Disposed

Cheerans Structurals, v. Micro and Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

Kerala HC12 Aug 2022WP(C)/22718/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam addressed a writ petition concerning delay by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council in concluding dispute resolution proceedings under the MSMED Act, 2006. The court directed the Council to conclude the proceedings within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 1st respondent (Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council) to conclude the proceedings initiated by Ext.P1 within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Cheerans Structurals, Vs Micro and Micro and… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 22718 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

CHEERANS STRUCTURALS,

¶8

IV/213, CHALLISSERY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 536, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SHRI.SHIRILSON C.MATHEW. BY ADVS.

¶9

G.HARIKUMAR (GOPINATHAN NAIR) AKHIL SURESH

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 MICRO AND MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES FACILITATION COUNCIL, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033, REPRESENTED BY ITS OFFICER IN CHARGE.

¶12

2 M/S. SOBHA LTD., TC 4/380, SREE NILAYAM, KIZHAKKUMKARA KULATHOOR P.O., TRIVANDRUM-691 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT.

¶13

BY ADVS.

¶14

RIYAL DEVASSY, GOVERNMENT PLEADER ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR)

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO.22718 OF 2021

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 12^th day of August, 2022

¶20

The petitioner is a partnership firm classified as Small Enterprise as per the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. The business transactions between the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent gave raise to a dispute, which prompted the petitioner to approach the 1^st respondent Council. The petitioner is aggrieved by the delay on the part of the 1^st respondent in concluding the proceedings initiated through Ext.P1.

¶21

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and the learned Counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶22

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, as per Section 18(5) of the MSMED Act, 1^st respondent has to conclude the proceedings within 90 days.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the 2^nd respondent

¶24

¶25

WP(C) NO.22718 OF 2021

¶26

submitted that the 1^st respondent Council is not sitting regularly and even otherwise, the 2^nd respondent should be afforded opportunity to file objection and for hearing, before the matter is decided.

¶27

Learned Government Pleader pointed out that, since some of petitioner’s claims are admitted, it would be advisable for the petitioner to file a revised claim.

¶28

Having heard the learned Counsel on both sides and considering that the MSMED Act is intended to provide early resolution of disputes, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to conclude the proceedings initiated by Ext.P1, within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE

NB/12-8

WP(C) NO.22718 OF 2021

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22718/2021

¶36

PETITION	ER’S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT	P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION NO.KL02A0007017/ S/00001 DATED 14.08.2020.
EXHIBIT	P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE STATUS REPORT FROM THE WEBSITE OF 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.04.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.07.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.09.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶37

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶38

TRUE COPY

¶39

P.A. TO JUDGE

Cheerans Structurals, v. Micro and Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cheerans Structurals, v. Micro and Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adv. a. M. Ariff Vs the Union of India

K.K.Sugathan Vs Punarjani Securities Limited

Dr.a.Ashokan Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Ashraf Vs the Director, Kerala State It Mission and Akshaya

Dr.Sreedev T.S Vs State of Kerala

Anu Babu Vs Kerala State Coastal Area Development Corporation