Dismissed

Kjv Alloy Conductors Pvt. Ltd, v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Kerala HC9 Feb 2022WP(C)/26836/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ to restrain encashment of Bank Guarantee and dire compliance with an Arbitral Award under MSMED Act. Court was informed appeal was pending before District Court. Writ petition dismissed with liberty to raise grievances in pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

Relief prayed for dismissed; liberty granted to raise grievances in pending Arbitration Appeal before District Court, Nagpur.

Kjv Alloy Conductors Pvt. Ltd, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board… — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 9^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 20TH MAGHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 26836 OF 2021

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

M/S.KJV ALLOY CONDUCTORS PVT LTD., PLOT NO.31, MIDC HINGNA, CENTRAL SERVICES ROAD, NAGPUR(MS)-440 016 REPRESENTED BY TENDER EXECUTIVE, SAURABH KURODE, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O SHARAD KURODE, NARMADA COLONY, KATOL ROAD, NAGPUR-440013.

¶6

BY ADVS. VINAY RAMDAS K.B.ANAMIKA

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., VYDYUTHIBHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695004, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶9

2 THE CHIEF ENGINEER (SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695004.

¶10

3 DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA -695004.

¶11

4 UCO BANK, MIDCORPORATE BRANCH, AJANI SQUARE, WARDHA ROAD, NAGPUR-440015, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER.

¶12

R1-3 BY SRI.SUDHEER GANESH KUMAR.R, SC R4 BY SRI.H.RAMANAN, SC

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C)No.26836/2021

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Dated this the 9^th day of February, 2022

¶18

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to

¶19

direct the 1^st respondent not to encash Ext.P8 Bank Guarantee

¶20

and further to direct respondents 1 to 3 to comply with Ext.P7 Arbitral Award in letter and spirit. By Ext.P7 Arbitral Award, the

¶21

MSE Facilitation Council, Nagpur directed as follows:

¶22

“a) The claim of balance payment u/s. 15 of MSMED Act of Rs.29,35,073/- (Twenty-Nine Lacs, Thirty-Five Thousand & Seventy-three) for the goods supplied by the applicant supplier M/s. KJV Alloy Conductors Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur, Maharashtra against the non-applicant buyer Chief Engineer (SCM), Kerala State Electricity Board, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala is here by allowed.

¶23

b) Interest on delayed payment is allowed u/s.16 of the MSMED Act, 2006 in respect of balance payment of the applicant against the nonapplicant is here by allowed.

¶24

c) Admissible period of 45 days allowed u/s. 15 of the MSMED Act, 2006 shall starts from the

¶25

WP(C)No.26836/2021

¶26

¶27

date of acceptance of the goods for amount mentioned in para 11(a) & 11(b) & from 06.12.2017 i.e. after four months from the date of intimation of damages i.e. 06.08.2017 for amount mentioned in para 11(c).

¶28

d) The claim of interest is to be calculated as per Section 16 of the MSMED Act, 2006 till the date of realisation of due amount.

¶29

e) Both the parties to file compliance report in respect of present order to this council within three months from the date of issue of this order.

¶30

2. The learned Standing Counsel representing

¶31

respondents 1 to 3 submitted that as the period of Bank Guarantee was to expire, respondents 1 to 3 have already directed the Bank to realise the Bank Guarantee amount. Furthermore, respondents 1 to 3 have already preferred appeal against Ext.P7 Award of MSE Facilitation Council, Nagpur before the District Court, Nagpur and the appeal is numbered as Arbitrational Appeal No.258 of 2021. In the afore circumstances, this Court need not grant the relief prayed for by the petitioner.

¶32

In view of the facts stated by respondents 1 to 3, the writ petition is dismissed, however, granting liberty to the

¶33

¶34

¶35

petitioner to raise their subsisting grievances, if any, in the Arbitration Appeal pending before the District Court, Nagpur or

¶36

before any other appropriate forum.

¶37

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26836/2021

¶42

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶43

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION DATED 05/07/1995.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF EXTRACT OF RESOLUTION PASSED AT THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS DATED 15/11/2011.
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF A PROCUREMENT-NOTICE INVITING TENDER (BID
	NO.KSEB/SCM/EP/50/2015-16 DATED 16/02/2016).
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT AND SCHEDULE FOR SUPPLY FOR MATERIALS.
Exhibit P5	A TRUE COPY OF PURCHASE ORDER MADE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS
	P.O.NO.SCM.63/2016-2017/3207 DATED 03/09/2016.
Exhibit P6	A TRUE COPY OF BANK GUARANTEE ON 06/03/2017.
Exhibit P7	A TRUE COPY OF ARBITRAL AWARD IN REFERENCE NO:MH-638/2018 DATED 23/12/2020.
Exhibit P8	A TRUE COPY OF BANK GUARANTEE ON 25/11/2017.
Exhibit P9	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 20/10/2021.
Exhibit P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 22/10/2021 SEEKING TO EXTEND THE EXHIBIT P8 BANK GUARANTEE ON THE GROUND THAT CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS AS PER
	TERMS OF ARBITRAL AWARD HAS NOT BEEN FULFILLED.

Kjv Alloy Conductors Pvt. Ltd, v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kjv Alloy Conductors Pvt. Ltd, v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kripa Charitable Society Vs District Social Justice Officer

Muraleedharan Pillai Vs Land Revenue Commissioner

Sherly Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited (Ksfe)

Purathur Maveli Store Samrashana Samathi Purathur Represented by Its Convener Vs State of Kerala Represented by Its Principal Secretary

Joseph M.C Vs Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited

Alias K Kuriakose, Vs Kerala Water Authority