Dismissed¶75

Elgi Rubber Company Limited v. the Director Cum Nodal Officer

Madras HC12 Mar 2026WP/19557/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Elgi Rubber Company Limited v. Director-cum-Nodal Officer, Institute of Road Transport and TNSTC (Coimbatore/Villupuram/Salem); Madras High Court common order dated 12-03-2026; Krishnan Ramasamy J.; Article 226 mandamus for recovery of rubber-supply dues (Rs.66,824 to Rs.2,37,71,796) with 12% interest; tender dated 26.10.2021; contract/purchase orders dated 17.12.2021; 90%-within-45-days payment term; quality of goods disputed; arbitration clause in contract; petitions dismissed with liberty to invoke arbitration or approach Civil Court; no precedents discussed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court or the Arbitrator by invoking the arbitration clause entered between the parties in their contract agreement; no costs awarded. ¶75

Elgi Rubber Company Limited Vs the Director Cum… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court or the Arbitrator by invoking the arbitration clause entered between the parties in their contract agreement; no costs awarded.

¶75

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can be directed, by writ of mandamus, to pay the admitted amounts described in the prayers, due and payable to the petitioner with interest at 12% per annum. +1 more

¶64

Ratio / Principle

Since the second respondents dispute the quality of the goods supplied by the petitioner, such disputed question of fact has to be decided by the consumer forum or the Civil Court, and not in these writ proceedings.

¶72

Key takeaways

Because an arbitration clause is available in the contract entered between the petitioner and the respondents, the petitioner can very well invoke the arbitration clause to resolve the present dispute.ratio¶72
The writ petitions are dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court or the Arbitrator by invoking the arbitration clause entered between the parties in their contract agreement, and with no costs.ratio¶75

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, by common order dated 12-03-2026 (Krishnan Ramasamy J.), dismissed nine writ petitions (WP Nos.19557, 19561, 19564, 19565, 19599, 19602, 19604, 19605 and 19609 of 2023) filed under Article 226 by Elgi Rubber Company Limited seeking mandamus to compel the Director-cum-Nodal Officer, Institute of Road Transport, and the TNSTCs of Coimbatore, Villupuram and Salem to pay supply dues (claiming Rs.66,824 to Rs.2,37,71,796 per petition) with interest at 12% per annum under a tender dated 26.10.2021 and contract order dated 17.12.2021 for pre-cured tread rubber, black vulcanizing cement and bonding gum, under which 90% was payable within 45 days of delivery. Holding that the corporations' dispute over quality of goods was a disputed question of fact for the consumer forum or Civil Court, and that the contract contained an arbitration clause, the Court dismissed the petitions with liberty to invoke arbitration or approach the Civil Court, without costs.

¶1

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

WP No. 19557 of 2023 AND

¶7

WP NO. 19604 OF 2023,WP NO. 19561 OF 2023,WP NO. 19564 OF 2023,WP NO. 19605 OF 2023,WP NO. 19602 OF 2023,WP NO. 19599 OF 2023,WP NO. 19609 OF 2023,WP NO. 19565 OF 2023

¶8

Elgi Rubber Company Limited, Super A Unit, Coimbatore Private Industrial Estate, Kurichi, Coimbatore 641 021. Rep By Its Authorised Signatory

¶9

Petitioner in all W.Ps

¶10

¶11

1.The Director Cum Nodal Officer, Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 113.

¶12

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Coimbatore Limited, Coimbatore 641 043.

¶13

Respondents in W.P.No.19557 of 2023

¶14

1.The Director Cum Nodal Officer, Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 113.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶17

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Villupuram Ltd., Post Box No. 56, Villupuram 605 602.

¶18

Respondents in WP No. 19604 of 2023

¶19

1.The Director Cum Nodal Officer, Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 113.

¶20

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram Limited Post Box No. 56, Villupuram 605 602.

¶21

Respondents in WP No. 19561 of 2023

¶22

The Director Cum Nodal Officer Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 113.

¶23

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport, Corproation Salem Limited 12, Ramakrishna Road, Seerangapalayam Salem 636 007.

¶24

Respondents in WP No. 19564 of 2023

¶25

The Director Cum Nodal Officer, Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 113.

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶28

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Salem Ltd., 12 Ramakrishna Rd, Seerangapalayam, Salem 636 007.

¶29

Respondents in WP No. 19605 of 2023

¶30

The Director Cum Nodal Officer, Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 113.

¶31

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport, Corporation Coimbatore Ltd., Coimbatore 641 043.

¶32

Respondents in WP No. 19602 of 2023

¶33

The Director Cum Nodal Officer Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 113

¶34

2.The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Coimbatore Ltd., Coimbatore 641 043

¶35

Respondents in WP No. 19599 of 2023

¶36

¶37

The Director Cum Nodal Officer Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 113

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶40

2.The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Salem Ltd., 12 Ramakrishna Rd, Seerangapalayam, Salem 636 007

¶41

Respondents in WP No. 19609 of 2023

¶42

1.The Director Cum Nodal Officer, Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 113.

¶43

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram Limited, Post Box No 56, Villupuram 605 602.

¶44

Respondents in WP No. 19565 of 2023

¶45

PRAYER in WP No. 19557 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs 13,20,693/(Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Twenty Thousand Six Hundred and ninety three only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶46

PRAYER in WP No. 19604 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, direction to the respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs. 1,78,918 (Rupees One Lakh Seventy Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighteen only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶49

PRAYER in WP No. 19561 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, seeking for the direction to the Respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs 1,44,53,210/- (Rupees One Crore Forthy-Four Lakhs Fifty-Three Thousand Two Hundred and Ten only ) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶50

PRAYER in WP No. 19564 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, seeking for the direction to the Respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs 66,824/- (Rupees Sixty Six Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Four only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶51

PRAYER in WP No. 19605 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, direction to the respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs. 21,36,802 (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Thirty Six Thousand Eight Hundred and Two only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶52

PRAYER in WP No. 19602 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, direction to the respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs. 32,38,393 /- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Three only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶53

PRAYER in WP No. 19599 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, direction to the respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs.

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶55

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶56

2,37,71,796/- (Rupees Two Crore Thirty Seven Lakhs Seventy One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety Six only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶57

PRAYER in WP No. 19609 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, direction to the respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs. 3,95,338 /- (Rupees Three Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty Eight only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶58

PRAYER in WP No. 19565 of 2023:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, seeking for the direction to the Respondents herein to pay the admitted amount of Rs 11,17,532/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred and Thirty Two only) due to the petitioner along with interest at the 12 percent p.a.

¶59

For Petitioner Mr.Salai Varun in all W.Ps For R1 in all W.Ps Mr.C.Gauthamaraj For R2 in Mr.L.S.M. Hasan Fizal, W.P.Nos.19557, 19605, 19602, 19564, 19599 & 19609 of 2023 For R2 in Mr.Aswin W.P.Nos.19604, 19561 & Standing Counsel 19656 of 2023

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶61

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶62

COMMON ORDER

¶63

These writ petitions have been filed seeking to direct the respondents to

¶64

pay the admitted amounts morefully described in the prayer to these writ petitions, which are due and payable to the petitioner with an interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

¶65

2.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 1^st respondent floated a tender dated 26.10.2021 for procurement of pre-cured tread rubber, for supply of Black Vulcanizing Cement and supply of Bonding Gum for a period of six months commencing from 17.12.2021 for the 2^nd respondents. The petitioner has participated in the tender and was awarded the tender as evidenced by the order dated 17.12.2021 of the 1^st respondent. The petitioner had then furnished the bank guarantee and secured purchase orders from the concerned State Corporations, who are the 2^nd respondents herein. As per the contract order dated 17.12.2021, the 2^nd respondent should release 90% of the payment to the petitioner within 45 days of delivery and the balance 10% shall be payable after the 2^nd respondents have achieved its performance guarantee. However, the 2^nd respondents herein have failed to make the payment to the petitioners and withhold the entire payment. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶66

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶67

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶68

3.Learned respective counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondents would

¶69

submit that the goods supplied by the petitioner are inferior in quality and therefore the 2^nd respondents are not liable to pay the amount. However, he

¶70

would also submit that an arbitration clause is available in the contract agreement and hence, the petitioner can very well invoke the arbitration clause. Instead of invoking the arbitration clause, the petitioner has wrongly approached this Court. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of this writ petition.

¶71

4.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government Advocate appearing for the 1^st respondent as well as the learned respective counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶72

5.Considering the submissions made by either parties, this Court is of the view that since the 2^nd respondents dispute the quality of the goods supplied by the petitioner, such disputed question of fact has to be decided by the consumer forum or the Civil Court. However, as rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondents, since an arbitration clause is available in the contract entered between the petitioner and the respondents, the petitioner can very well invoke the arbitration clause to resolve the present dispute.

¶73

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶74

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶75

6.In view of the above, these writ petitions are dismissed with liberty to

¶76

approach the Civil Court or the Arbitrator by invoking the arbitration clause

¶77

entered between the parties in their contract agreement. No costs.

¶78

12-03-2026

¶79

rst

¶80

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶81

¶82

1.The Director Cum Nodal Officer, Institute Of Road Transport, 100 Feet Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 113.

¶83

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Coimbatore Limited, Coimbatore 641 043.

¶84

3.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram Ltd., Post Box No. 56, Villupuram 605 602.

¶85

4.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Salem Limited 12, Ramakrishna Road, Seerangapalayam, Salem 636 007.

¶86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶87

WP No. 19557 of 2023

¶88

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.

¶89

rst

¶90

WP No. 19557 of 2023 AND WP NO. 19604 OF 2023, WP NO. 19561 OF 2023, WP NO. 19564 OF 2023, WP NO. 19605 OF 2023, WP NO. 19602 OF 2023, WP NO. 19599 OF 2023, WP NO. 19609 OF 2023, WP NO. 19565 OF 2023

¶91

12-03-2026

¶92

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Elgi Rubber Company Limited v. the Director Cum Nodal Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Elgi Rubber Company Limited v. the Director Cum Nodal Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Sd Infra Private Limited, Vs The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways

R.Pradeep Kumar Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Koolan Vs the Arbitrator Cum District Collector

M.B.Kaja Sheriff Vs the chairman

G.Peraman@Perumal Vs the District Collector

A.Munusamy Vs the District Collector