w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Ved Prakash (Authorized Representative) M/s Karmic Energy Private Limited v/s P. Ponram, Managing Partner, M/s Unicon Engineers


Company & Directors' Information:- ENGINEERS INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = L74899DL1965GOI004352

Company & Directors' Information:- H-ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40300MH2007PTC175626

Company & Directors' Information:- A A ENERGY LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40100MH2005PLC157604

Company & Directors' Information:- K M ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40300UP2014PTC067293

Company & Directors' Information:- R. R. ENERGY LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40109CT2004PLC016580

Company & Directors' Information:- B S B K ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U74210DL1985PTC021596

Company & Directors' Information:- ENERGY INDIA CORPORATION LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101MH2008PLC181157

Company & Directors' Information:- B & S ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40108KA2008PTC048416

Company & Directors' Information:- M M ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U02919TZ1987PTC001936

Company & Directors' Information:- D K D ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101TZ1993PTC004673

Company & Directors' Information:- N L ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27109PB1997PTC020362

Company & Directors' Information:- M. E ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51503PN1998PTC114226

Company & Directors' Information:- K ENERGY COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40100CT2007PLC020433

Company & Directors' Information:- S AND T ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51103TZ2009PTC015456

Company & Directors' Information:- V A ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U29299MH1997PTC215888

Company & Directors' Information:- I & B ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45309WB2008PTC124644

Company & Directors' Information:- U R ENERGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40108GJ2011PTC067834

Company & Directors' Information:- AT AND T ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45203DL2012PTC239940

Company & Directors' Information:- N K R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29293GJ2004PTC045176

Company & Directors' Information:- C C ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U30009PN1991PTC063868

Company & Directors' Information:- M AND T ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1989PTC036107

Company & Directors' Information:- J G ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U45402WB1970PTC027713

Company & Directors' Information:- B & G ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40107TN2006PTC061362

Company & Directors' Information:- P E ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74210TG1981PTC003247

Company & Directors' Information:- M S ENGINEERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200MH2006PTC159314

Company & Directors' Information:- C K ENGINEERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74200CH1997PTC020744

Company & Directors' Information:- U N F ENGINEERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31102AS2003PTC007198

Company & Directors' Information:- A V ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29306CH2002PTC024874

Company & Directors' Information:- J AND K ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Converted to LLP and Dissolved] CIN = U29259GJ1982PTC005625

Company & Directors' Information:- J C I ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U40102KA2011PTC058550

Company & Directors' Information:- ENERGY INDIA LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1998PLC096211

Company & Directors' Information:- T & I ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29252AS2000PTC006243

Company & Directors' Information:- H B ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65910GJ1995PTC027208

Company & Directors' Information:- KARMIC ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40107DL2010PTC202128

Company & Directors' Information:- PRAKASH ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U27101OR1993PTC003273

Company & Directors' Information:- B. K. ENGINEERS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28112MH2011PTC214002

Company & Directors' Information:- K C K ENGINEERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29299DL1993PTC056432

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED. [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL2000PTC103993

Company & Directors' Information:- I I S C ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201TN1986PTC013124

Company & Directors' Information:- J. S. W. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29120MH2010PTC288640

Company & Directors' Information:- K A ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999DL2003PTC119859

Company & Directors' Information:- K L R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210TG1996PTC024040

Company & Directors' Information:- V ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40102TG2011PTC073693

Company & Directors' Information:- J B C ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U31300DL2004PTC125469

Company & Directors' Information:- T R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29111DL2004PTC126852

Company & Directors' Information:- D C ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210MH1999PTC118382

Company & Directors' Information:- E C ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U28920MH1981PTC024675

Company & Directors' Information:- B J & P ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28910TN2008PTC067728

Company & Directors' Information:- K B ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U27202WB1987PTC041979

Company & Directors' Information:- N B S ENGINEERS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999DL1998PTC096033

Company & Directors' Information:- N. C. R. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400UP2008PTC034625

Company & Directors' Information:- V K G ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U45202PB2006PTC030194

Company & Directors' Information:- S M M ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40109TG2014PTC092679

Company & Directors' Information:- C & C ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29299DL2010PTC204724

Company & Directors' Information:- J C ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29248HR1988PTC030208

Company & Directors' Information:- U S G ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29307TZ2005PTC012414

Company & Directors' Information:- K C ENGINEERS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999HR2005PLC035602

Company & Directors' Information:- K C ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999HR2005PTC035602

Company & Directors' Information:- H H ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27109PB1996PTC018479

Company & Directors' Information:- A B T ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40108KA1983PTC005321

Company & Directors' Information:- C & L ENGINEERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U29190DL1998PTC096952

Company & Directors' Information:- G AND M ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U74210MH1986PTC041517

Company & Directors' Information:- A & T ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40106GJ2012PTC070207

Company & Directors' Information:- H V ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U45202PB1978PTC003839

Company & Directors' Information:- M K C ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U30009WB1988PTC045711

Company & Directors' Information:- K E ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40300TN2011PTC080288

Company & Directors' Information:- I T ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL2005PTC136156

Company & Directors' Information:- E B P ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U52392DL2003PTC118311

Company & Directors' Information:- L S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29120MH2000PTC129659

Company & Directors' Information:- H V ENGINEERS P LTD. [Active] CIN = U27106WB1990PTC050281

Company & Directors' Information:- S M R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29199TZ2000PTC009464

Company & Directors' Information:- H L E ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U29199GJ2004PTC044905

Company & Directors' Information:- V V S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U27310AP1985PTC005668

Company & Directors' Information:- A C F ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15209MH1988PTC049094

Company & Directors' Information:- V B ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U25209MH2009PTC191163

Company & Directors' Information:- D V ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1994PTC061013

Company & Directors' Information:- F L B ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28932MH1985PTC035994

Company & Directors' Information:- S B R ENGINEER'S PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45202WB2000PTC092506

Company & Directors' Information:- J. S. W. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29120PN2010PTC136515

Company & Directors' Information:- R K R ENGINEERS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45206TN2013PTC092795

Company & Directors' Information:- V A R ENERGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40300TG2014PTC095926

Company & Directors' Information:- P J B ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210KA1999PTC024856

Company & Directors' Information:- C & N ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40100KL2011PTC028837

Company & Directors' Information:- H M S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29219CH1991PTC011585

Company & Directors' Information:- PRAKASH ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U85190DL1996PTC082306

Company & Directors' Information:- J L ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28920MH2000PTC124206

Company & Directors' Information:- P M C ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74210KL1981PTC003354

Company & Directors' Information:- M K D ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31908UP2015PTC070501

Company & Directors' Information:- J J V ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74200HR2013PTC048964

Company & Directors' Information:- P T R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Liquidation] CIN = U31901TN1979PTC007806

Company & Directors' Information:- S L V ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72501TZ2000PTC009366

Company & Directors' Information:- UNICON ENERGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40108TZ2009PTC015189

Company & Directors' Information:- C. B. S. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74120UP2011PTC045651

Company & Directors' Information:- C I T L ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40108TG2010PTC066844

Company & Directors' Information:- C R B ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40108TG2010PTC066845

Company & Directors' Information:- VED PRAKASH CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17200DL2013PTC255680

Company & Directors' Information:- M R K ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U21014KA1995PTC018466

Company & Directors' Information:- ENERGY ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1980PTC014208

Company & Directors' Information:- H R M ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH1998PTC117606

Company & Directors' Information:- P C ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U34300CH1985PTC006093

Company & Directors' Information:- J S ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202HP2006PTC030006

Company & Directors' Information:- R H ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74200CH1984PTC005944

Company & Directors' Information:- T V G ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U52100UP2014PTC066243

Company & Directors' Information:- G-4 ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U32204MH2008PTC177646

Company & Directors' Information:- G S ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74210PB1994PTC014225

Company & Directors' Information:- H I ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74210WB1984PTC037097

Company & Directors' Information:- S A ENGINEERS LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U28932WB1977PLC031202

Company & Directors' Information:- ENGINEERS LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U29100WB1933PLC007579

Company & Directors' Information:- G B ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74210WB1982PTC034958

Company & Directors' Information:- 3 ENERGY ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900DL2012PTC231361

Company & Directors' Information:- G G ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1994PTC058590

Company & Directors' Information:- R. J. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29199TZ1990PTC002690

Company & Directors' Information:- A R ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U45203OR1993PTC003413

Company & Directors' Information:- M. Y. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28920MH1999PTC119174

Company & Directors' Information:- P & A ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70101OR2011PTC014428

Company & Directors' Information:- M AND D (ENGINEERS) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28932MH1975PTC018333

Company & Directors' Information:- Q M ENGINEERS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31100MH2006PTC159261

Company & Directors' Information:- V G ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40100MH2005PTC156544

Company & Directors' Information:- D R R ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40102TN2009PTC073741

Company & Directors' Information:- Q - ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920WB2012FTC182047

Company & Directors' Information:- A G ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1986PTC024138

Company & Directors' Information:- Y A ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL2001PTC110304

Company & Directors' Information:- R. F. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U32100DL2010PTC199732

Company & Directors' Information:- A - Z ENERGY ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40300DL2012PTC236342

Company & Directors' Information:- A TO Z ENGINEERS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29299DL1988PTC030239

Company & Directors' Information:- K J S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74210DL1998PTC093851

Company & Directors' Information:- A P ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29269UP1991PTC013866

Company & Directors' Information:- S S ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U28931TN1987PTC015093

Company & Directors' Information:- A S ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74999TG1988PTC008455

Company & Directors' Information:- N R S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29269UP1992PTC014881

Company & Directors' Information:- S R V ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U24231UP1988PTC009258

Company & Directors' Information:- V R F ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U32201GJ1986PTC008400

Company & Directors' Information:- A. B. T. ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U28111OR1993PTC003388

Company & Directors' Information:- B S B ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U27106WB1971PTC027952

Company & Directors' Information:- A B K ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29253DL2008PTC178060

Company & Directors' Information:- H J ENGINEERS PRIVATE LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1987PTC027668

Company & Directors' Information:- UNICON ENGINEERS P LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U45203CH1985PTC006384

Company & Directors' Information:- A R ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Not available for efiling] CIN = U71220UP1978PTC004701

Company & Directors' Information:- K K ENGINEERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74200CH1984PTC005826

Company & Directors' Information:- D H ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51109WB1963PTC025758

Company & Directors' Information:- G F M ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U45202WB1969PTC027476

Company & Directors' Information:- P R M ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29120UP1988PTC009249

Company & Directors' Information:- R B ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24230MH2003PTC141901

Company & Directors' Information:- H R ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101RJ2003PTC018712

Company & Directors' Information:- F S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210TN1973PTC006482

Company & Directors' Information:- U. K. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31900PN2008PTC132332

Company & Directors' Information:- J R J R ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40100MH2005PTC153641

Company & Directors' Information:- R M ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40108MH2003PTC142881

Company & Directors' Information:- J B ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900MH2012PTC226187

Company & Directors' Information:- S & E ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999PN2010PTC135666

Company & Directors' Information:- S V E ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40100TN2009PTC073738

Company & Directors' Information:- L V S ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U40101TG2010PTC068290

Company & Directors' Information:- A. S. R. ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40105TG2008PTC056907

Company & Directors' Information:- S S E ENERGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40108TG2014PTC093709

Company & Directors' Information:- K & H ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40109AP2012PTC079162

Company & Directors' Information:- P & S ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40109TG2011PTC072632

Company & Directors' Information:- D B S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210UP2010PTC084195

Company & Directors' Information:- G K V ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999TN2010PTC077912

Company & Directors' Information:- P A ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40100HP2006PTC030328

Company & Directors' Information:- S & G ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U31101CH2010PTC032133

Company & Directors' Information:- G H ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28939DL2004PTC130703

Company & Directors' Information:- N R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29292DL2011PTC221986

Company & Directors' Information:- B N R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1973PTC006709

Company & Directors' Information:- K M ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2014PTC272465

Company & Directors' Information:- P M S ENERGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999DL2012PTC236645

Company & Directors' Information:- D M ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40107DL2010PTC199110

Company & Directors' Information:- S K S ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40108DL2003PTC119741

Company & Directors' Information:- C P ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40109DL2010PTC204395

Company & Directors' Information:- 3 A S ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40300DL2013PTC250263

Company & Directors' Information:- I S R ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking off] CIN = U40103AP2012PTC084585

Company & Directors' Information:- T AND F ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40100MP2011PTC026065

Company & Directors' Information:- V V ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40101KA2008PTC046429

Company & Directors' Information:- E P C ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40107KA2010PTC053645

Company & Directors' Information:- R J ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40100GJ2009PTC056990

Company & Directors' Information:- I ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40100GJ2009PTC058473

Company & Directors' Information:- L. K. ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29308PN2020PTC190150

Company & Directors' Information:- D B R ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74140DL1995PTC066347

Company & Directors' Information:- N K ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U65921UP1954PTC002533

Company & Directors' Information:- H. R. ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74999PB1973PTC003316

Company & Directors' Information:- ENGINEERS CORPORATION PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74300WB1946PTC022035

Company & Directors' Information:- O P M S ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1984PTC018969

Company & Directors' Information:- I S C ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74140DL1983PTC017046

Company & Directors' Information:- G P B ENGINEERS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U29212RJ1990PTC005595

Company & Directors' Information:- THE ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999KA1948PTC000551

Company & Directors' Information:- S PRAKASH AND COMPANY LIMITED [Dissolved] CIN = U99999MH1938PTC002840

Company & Directors' Information:- M. AND S. (ENGINEERS) LIMITED [Dissolved] CIN = U99999MH1952PLC008956

Company & Directors' Information:- ENERGY ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED [Not available for efiling] CIN = U99999MH1980PLC022157

    Original Side Appeal No. 231 of 2019

    Decided On, 23 January 2020

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

    For the Appellant: Rajkumar Jhabakh, Advocate. For the Respondents: B. Manoharan, Advocate.



Judgment Text


(Original Side Appeal is filed under Order XXXVII of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order and decree dated 08.01.2019 made in O.P.No.424 of 2018.)

M.M. Sundresh, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred against the dismissal of O.P.No.424 of 2018.filed invoking Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by which, the award dated 05.08.2016 has been confirmed.

2. Brief Facts:-

2.1. The appellant before us was the purchaser while the respondent, supplier. The respondent is engaged in manufacturing of Electro Static Precipitation(ESP) components. Supplies were made to the appellant by the respondent. As there was substantial due from the appellant to the respondent, after making all efforts, an approach was made by seeking a reference under the provisions of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'MSMED Act') to the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (for short 'MSEF Council') by invoking Section 18 of the MSMED Act. The Council sent its letter along with enclosures to the appellant, by the letter dated 10.05.2015. To be noted, the respondent has given due intimation to the appellant that he would initiate proceedings under MSMED Act through their communication dated 26.12.2015. After due acknowledgement of the notice by MSEF Council, the appellant sent a letter stating that it would go under the arbitration as per the following clause contained in the agreement sent by the parties.

“N. Arbitration:

If at any time, any question, dispute, or difference whatsoever shall arise between the Purchaser and the Supplier upon or in relation to or in connection with the contract, either party may forthwith give to the other notice in writing of the existence of such question, dispute or difference and the same shall be referred to the adjudication of one Arbitrator to be nominated by the Purchaser in their sole discretion only with place of Arbitration being New Delhi. The award to be given by such arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties hereto.”

The appellant also intimated the respondent about the appointment of an Arbitrator by the communication dated 03.06.2016.

2.2. Objections were also raised through the counsel before the MSEF Council. The appellant, after taking sufficient time, did not choose to appear further. Accordingly, the conciliation proceedings were closed and thereafter, the arbitration proceedings started. The appellant continued to be absent in view of his stand that the proceedings before the MSEF Council is not maintainable. By going through the relevant records, the award was passed on 05.08.2016.

2.3.Upon coming to know of the award having been passed followed by the execution proceedings, the appellant approached this Court invoking Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act while seeking predeposit, which is the condition precedent mandated under Section 19 of the MSMED Act. The appellant contended that the very proceeding itself is not maintainable. It was accordingly answered by the learned single Judge through the following passage in the order dated 22.03.2017.

“8. At this juncture, it is appropriate to consider the case of Edukanti Kistamma (Dead) through LRs. V. S.Venkatareddy (dead) through Lrs (2010 (1) SCC 756), where the Supreme court explained that a special statute would be preferred over a general one where it is beneficial. It was explained that the purport and object of the Act must be given its full effect by applying the principles of “purposive construction”. The question whether the dispute resolution mechanism under Section 18 of the MSMED Act overrides the arbitration clause under the contract has to be answered in the affirmative. As was explained in Waman Shriniwas Kini V. Ratilal Bhagwandas & Co. (A.I.R. 1959 S.C. 689) an agreement contrary to a statutory provision that prohibits it would be unenforceable.

8.1. Thus, it is clear that, out of two enactments, the provisions of the MSMED Act would prevail especially when it has a overriding provision under Section 24 where it has been clearly said that Section 15 to 23 shall have the overriding effect, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, the contention that the award passed by the Council is patently illegal, has to be rejected and it is rejected accordingly.”

2.4. An appeal was preferred before this Court in O.S.A.No.96 of 2017, which was also disposed of on 25.10.2017. The following is the requisite finding given.

“17. On the short point that Section 19 of MSMED Act is non-negotiable, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. No infirmity or illegality in the order of the learned Single Judge has been pointed out before us.

18. In fact, the learned Single Judge has been considerate in permitting the appellant to make pre-deposit in three instalments. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that there is no need to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge.

19. At this juncture, learned counsel for the appellant made a request to us that the time granted by the learned Single Judge for pre-deposit of 75% of the Award amount may be extended. Mr.R.Sankara Narayanan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the counsel on record for the respondent in his usual fairness did not oppose this request.

20. Therefore, we are inclined to say that pre-deposit of 75% of the Award amount as contained in Section 19 of MSMED Act be made by the appellant, for which three instalments were permitted by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 22.03.2017 in Application No.1511 of 2017 in O.P. Diary No.6821 of 2017, now stands extended/modified. The extended/modified time frame is that the aforesaid 75% of the pre-deposit Award amount shall now be made in three equal fortnightly instalments and the first instalment shall be within a fortnight from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In all other aspects of the matter, the order of the learned Single Judge stands confirmed.

21. With the above observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of. Interim order already granted by this Court vide order dated 10.08.2017 shall continue to operate for a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Considering the nature of the matter and the trajectory of the proceedings, there will be no order regarding costs. Consequently, CMP.Nos.6698 & 8485 of 2017 are disposed of.”

2.5. Challenging the aforesaid order, a Special Leave Petition in SLP No.3931 of 2018 was filed by the appellant, which was also disposed of on 12.02.2018 by merely giving further time for pre-deposit of 75% of the Award Amount.

2.6. Thereafter, the appellant made the said deposit though it is the case of the respondent that appropriate amount has not been paid. The learned single Judge, however, did not go into the said issue while deciding to take up O.P.No.424 of 2019 on merit. Accordingly, it was dismissed by rejecting the contention of the appellant on the question of maintainability. Challenging the same, the present Original Side Appeal has been filed.

3. Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant:

3.1. Mr.Rajkumar Jhabakh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has laid two submissions. It is his first submission that the mechanism provided under the MSMED Act will have to give way to the agreed terms contained in the agreement by way of arbitration. For the aforesaid submission, reliance has been made on the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur in M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd., V. Micro, Small Enterprise Facilitation Council (2010 SCC Online Bom. 2208).

3.2. The other contention raised is to the continuation of the proceedings from conciliation to arbitration by the same persons of the MSEF Council. It is submitted that this procedure is contrary to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

4. Submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent:

4.1. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the appeal itself is not maintainable as the appellant has not complied with the pre-deposit of 75%. This 75% would mean the one awarded by the MSEF Council along with the interest component. The appellant did not even choose to appear for conciliation in person. In fact, he did not want conciliation as it was his case that the proceedings are not maintainable. Thus, he was aware of the proceedings. Strangely, he did not even pursue his stand of initiation of arbitral proceedings. The first contention sought to be raised has become concluded against the appellant in the earlier proceedings. He further submitted that the second contention also does not hold good in view of Section 18 of the MSMED Act having been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in M/s Refex Energy Limited, by its Managing Director Vs. Union of India and another dated 02.06.2016.

4.2. It is further submitted that the judgment of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court relied upon by the appellant has been impliedly overruled by the Apex Court which upheld the contra view of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Principal Chief Engineer Vs. M/z Manibhai and Brothers (Sleeper), the Apex Court in Diary No.16845/2017 dated 05.07.2017, wherein the interpretation on Section 18 of MSMED Act, has been upheld. Thus the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

5. DISCUSSION:

We have already narrated the facts. As there is no dispute with respect to the same including the non participation of the appellant in the conciliation and arbitration proceedings except appearance through the counsel at the initial stage. We would like to concentrate on the law governing the subject.

6. Section 18 of the MSMED Act.

6.1. “18.Reference to Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council.-

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any party to a dispute may, with regard to any amount due under section 17, make a reference to the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council.”

6.2. Section 18(1) deals with reference to Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council. It contains a non obstante clause. Thus it has a precedent over the other law. This is also a special Act. As recorded, this provision under Section 18 has also been held to be constitutionally valid.

6.3.Under Section 18(2) of the Act, it is open to the Council to undertake the process of conciliation either by it or through a deciding authority. The proceedings are to be conducted in tune with Sections 65 to 81 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

6.4.Sub Section 3 of Section 18 of the Act speaks of further follow up action on the termination of conciliation initiated under Sub Section 2. However, if it becomes a failure, in such a case, the Council by itself can take up the dispute for arbitration or refer it to any institution or Centre. This provision provides for both roles to the Council. The Council being a statutory body and not associated with either the supplier or the purchaser, and therefore independent, has been given the role to act either as conciliator or arbitrator or both. Thus, no bias or likelihood of bias can be attributed against a statutory party whose role is defined accordingly. Perhaps, an element of likelihood of bias might arise, when some persons acting on behalf of the Council act as conciliators and thereafter arbitrators. Therefore, while no allegation of likelihood of bias raised against the Council there is a possibility of the Conciliators getting impacted while discharging their roles as such and thereafter, changing them to that of Arbitrators. This may not be advisable. There is a marked difference between a conciliator acting as an arbitrator and vice versa. An Arbitrator may act as an conciliator during the course of arbitral proceedings. However, the role of conciliator being different and distinct, he would be better advised not to take the role of an Arbitrator thereafter, between the same parties pursuant to the termination of conciliation. This would ensure an element of fairness in action.

7. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996:-

7.1. Section 30 of the Act speaks of settlement between the parties, which is to be encouraged by the Arbitral Tribunal. It is apposite to refer the same hereunder.

30. Settlement.—

(1) It is not incompatible with an arbitration agreement for an arbitral tribunal to encourage settlement of the dispute and, with the agreement of the parties, the arbitral tribunal may use mediation, conciliation or other procedures at any time during the arbitral proceedings to encourage settlement.

(2) If, during arbitral proceedings, the parties settle the dispute, the arbitral tribunal shall terminate the proceedings and, if requested by the parties and not objected to by the arbitral tribunal, record the settlement in the form of an arbitral award on agreed terms.

(3) An arbitral award on agreed terms shall be made in accordance with section 31 and shall state that it is an arbitral award.

(4) An arbitral award on agreed terms shall have the same status and effect as any other arbitral award on the substance of the dispute.

Thus, Section 30 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is meant to encourage the parties to arrive at a settlement through the aegis of the arbitral Tribunal and importantly with the agreement of the parties. After that, the agreed terms would confirm part of the award of the Tribunal.

7.2. Part-III of the Act deals with Conciliation. Section 80 speaks of the role of a conciliator in other proceedings. Even here, the bar to act as an arbitrator between the same parties would arise when there is no consent. This Act, once again reiterates the position that a conciliator is not required to act as an arbitrator unless agreed upon as against the arbitrator indulging in conciliation.

8. Arbitration agreement Vs. Section 18 of the MSMED Act:

8.1. As stated, the Act would certainly have a primacy. It also provides for arbitration preceded by conciliation. One has to see the object and rationale behind the special enactment which is to encourage the parties to go for negotiation followed by the arbitration. In M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd., V. Micro, Small Enterprise Facilitation Council (2010 SCC Online Bom. 2208), the Division Bench of Mumbai High Court has held as follows.

11. Having considered the matter, we find that Section 18 (1) of the Act, in terms allows any party to a dispute relating to the amount due under Section 17 i.e. an amount due and payable by buyer to seller; to approach the facilitation Council. It is rightly contended by Mrs. Dangre, the learned Addl. Government Pleader, that there can be variety of disputes between the parties such as about the date of acceptance of the goods or the deemed day of acceptance, about schedule of supplies etc. because of which a “buyer may have a strong objection to the bills raised by the supplier in which case a buyer must be considered eligible to approach the Council. We find that Section 18(1) clearly allows any party to a dispute namely a buyer and a supplier to make reference to the Council. However, the question is; what would be the next step after such a reference is made, when an arbitration agreement exists between the parties or not. We find that there is no provision in the Act, which negates or renders an arbitration agreement entered into between the parties ineffective. Moreover, Section 24 of the Act, which is enacted to give an overriding effect to the provisions of Section 15 to 23-including section 18, which provides for forum for resolution of the dispute under the Act-would not have the effect of negating an arbitration agreement since that section overrides only such things that are inconsistent with Section 15 to 23 including Section 18 notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force. Section 18(3) of the Act in terms provides that where conciliation before the Council is not successful, the Council may itself take the dispute for arbitration or refer it to any institution or centre providing alternate dispute resolution and that the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall thus apply to the disputes as an arbitration in pursuance of arbitration agreement referred to in Section 7 (1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This procedure for arbitration and conciliation is precisely the procedure under which all arbitration agreements are dealt with. We, thus find that it cannot be said that because Section 18 provides for a forum of arbitration an independent arbitration agreement entered into between the parties will cease to have effect. There is no question of an independent arbitration agreement ceasing to have any effect because the overriding clause only overrides things inconsistent therewith and there is no inconsistency between an arbitration conducted by the Council under Section 18 and arbitration conducted under an individual clause since both are governed by the provision of the Arbitration Act, 1996.”

8.2. After having held as above, the Division Bench was pleased to direct the parties to exhaust Sections 18 (1) and (2) of the MSMED Act before resorting to the arbitration as agreed upon by way of an agreement, which is as follows.

“14. In the circumstances, we hold that respondent No.1- Council is not entitled to proceed under the provisions of Section 18 (3) of the Act in view of independent arbitration agreement dated 23.09.2005 between the parties. The petitioners and respondent no.2 shall, however, participate in the conciliation, which shall be conducted by respondent no.1-Council under the provisions of Section 18 (1) and (2) of the Act. Respondent no.1-Council shall complete the process of conciliation within a period of two weeks from the date the parties appear before it. The parties are directed to appear before respondent no.1-Council on 25.10 .2010.”

8.3. The law laid down in the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench, in our considered view, makes a party to undergo a process both under the MSMED Act and thereafter before the Arbitrator as per the terms of the agreement. Once a party is bound to exhaust Section 18 (1) and (2) of the MSMED Act, he has to go further by seeking remedy under Section 18 (3) of the MSMED Act.

8.4. The judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, has been taken note of and not found in agreement by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Principal Chief Engineer Vs. M/z Manibhai and Brothers (Sleeper). We place on record the following passage.

“6.2. Considering the aforesaid decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Council acting under Section 19 of the Act, 2006 cannot be said too be “Judicial Authority” performing judicial function or quasi judicial functions. As observed herein above, after conciliation failed, thereafter once the Council act as an Arbitrator itself, thereafter the Council had no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 8 of the Act. On fair reading of subsection (3) of Section 18 only in a case where the Council itself does not act as an Arbitrator and decide to refer the parties, centre or institution providing alternate dispute resolution services as observed in subsection (3) of Section 18 the provision of the Arbitration Act shall then apply to the dispute if the arbitration is in pursuance of the Arbitration Act refer to subsection (1) of Section 7 of that Act. 8.0. Now, so far as reliance placed upon the decision of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Steel Authority of India Ltd and Anr (supra) relied upon by Shri Patel, learned advocate for appellant, for the reasons stated above provision of Act 2006 referred herein above and the Act 2006 being Special Act under which the parties are governed, we are not in agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court and we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Paper and Board Convertors (supra).”

8.5. Challenge was made to this judgment before the Apex Court in Diary No. 16845 of 2017 dated 05/07/2017 which was dismissed with the following order.

“We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced before us yesterday and today. We are satisfied, that the interpretation placed by the High Court on Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, in the impugned order, with reference to arbitration proceeding is fully justified and in consonance with the provisions thereof. Having affirmed the above, we are of the view, that all other matters dealt with in the impugned order are not relevant for the adjudication of the present controversy, and need not be examined.”

8.6. Section 18 of the MSMED Act has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in M/s Refex Energy Limited, by its Managing Director Vs. Union of India and another dated 02.06.2016 referred supra, in which it has been held as follows.

“20. A cursory reading of the aforesaid provision makes it clear that a conciliator could not act as an arbitrator. It is no doubt true that sections 18(2), 18(3) and 18(4) have given dual role for the Facilitation Council to act both as Conciliators and Arbitrators. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, the Facilitation Council should not be allowed to act both as Conciliators and Arbitrators. This contention, though prima facie appears to be attractive, it is liable to be rejected on a closer scrutiny. Though the learned counsel would vehemently contend that the Conciliators could not act as Arbitrators, they could not place their hands on any of the decisions of upper forums of law in support of their contentions. As rightly pointed out by the learned single Judge, section 18(2) of MSMED Act has borrowed the provisions of sections 65 to 81 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for the purpose of conducting conciliation and, therefore, section 80 could not be a bar for the Facilitation Council to conciliate and thereafter arbitrate on the matter. Further the decision of the Supreme court in (1986) 4 SCC 537 (Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. L.K. Ratna), on this line has to be borne in mind. One should not forget that the decision of the Facilitation Council is not final and it is always subject to review under Article 226 of the constitution of India and, therefore, the appellants are not lef

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

t helpless.” 8.7. Thus, the issue involved is no longer res integra. Therefore, there is no bar to proceed further after the termination of conciliation proceedings. However, as discussed by us earlier, such proceedings by way of an arbitration shall not be conducted by the very same persons, who acted as conciliators. Thus, we hold so by taking note of Section 75 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which lays emphasis on the confidentiality of the conciliator. When a conciliator is expected to maintain confidentiality of the matters conveyed to him, he cannot thereafter change his role by involving himself in a continuing process, such as, arbitration. As Sections 65 to 81 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, are applicable to the proceedings under Section 18 of the MSMED Act, such conciliators, after termination, shall not act as arbitrators. We may also note that this aspect of the matter has not been dealt with by the Division Bench of this Court, which rightly held that the Council can perform the twin roles. As there is a marked difference between the role of the Council and the person appointed by it to perform as arbitrator, one shall not perform the twin roles unless and of course parties voluntarily affirm to it. 9. Case on hand:- In the case on hand, the appellant did not even take part in the conciliation process except by filing vakalath through his counsel. His objection was with respect to the maintainability. Such a stand was taken even earlier by sending a reply to the respondent, when it wanted to go through the arbitration in accordance with the terms of the agreement. Even that process he did not adopt. Being aware of the entire proceedings, it was primarily concerned with the jurisdiction of the Council, thus, did not even appear to respond to the arbitration proceedings and raised any objection either on law or on fact. Its grievance is against the jurisdiction and not the persons. 10. The contentions raised before us, especially with respect to the jurisdiction, has also been raised on the earlier occasion. Though we deal once again in an elaborate manner, suffice it is to state that the intention of the appellant is to drag on the proceedings and avoid its liability. The Tribunal passed a speaking order on merit. Thus, looking from any perspective, we do not find any reason to allow this original side appeal and accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, we place on record the excellent argument made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. No costs.
O R