Court : Delhi
..... the aaifr is concerned, we find that only one point was urged before it and that was with regard to whether the petitioner fell within the classification of small enterprise under the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 or not. the petitioner had not even taken the point with regard to the rejection of the reference of account of delay as ..... accounts of the financial year ending 31.03.2004. apart from the ground of delay, the bifr also rejected the reference because of the fact that in terms of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 read with notification s.o. 1642(e) dated 29.09.2006 as amended by s.o. 199(e) dated 16.01.2009, the ..... that the investment of the company on plant & machinery now is rs. 2.25 crore. in terms of the definition contained in section 7(1) clause (ii) of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 read with notification s.o. 1642(e) dt. 29.9.2006, as amended by s.o. 199 (e) dt. 16.1.2009, the enterprises .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... p.(c) 2273/2018, vide order dated 25th september, 2018. thus, despite an arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties to the litigation, if the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 is applicable to them, the mesf council, has the power, jurisdiction and authority under section 18(3) to either take up the ..... with section 24 of the act, 2006. lpa422019 page 2 of 6 7. for ready reference, section 18(3), 18(4) and section 24 of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 read as under : 18(3). where the conciliation initiated under sub-section (2) is not successful and stands terminated without any settlement ..... all efforts to facilitate conciliation between the parties to this litigation, but conciliation could not be arrived at and hence as per section 18(3) of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006, the council has referred the dispute for arbitration.3. being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, dated 1st may, 2017, of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... 75% of the principal amount but is contesting direction to deposit 75% of the interest amount. the contention raised is that the issue whether the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 would be applicable is a subject matter of the objections filed under section 34 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996. ..... left the issue open.4. learned counsel for the respondent has, however, disputed the last contention and submitted the issue with regard to applicability of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006, was specifically adjudicated in the letters patent appeal and slp was dismissed.5. be that as it may, we would not ..... interest amount in terms of the award can be treated as a harsh and burdensome. the appellant de-hors the applicability of section 19 of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006, does not deserve any indulgence and leniency. the appellant would accordingly deposit the said amount in terms of the order passed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... the said certificate was not issued with free consent. 3.5 on 09.07.2014, respondent no.2 filed an application under section 18 of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 (hereafter the msmed act ), before the council raising certain claims in respect of the aforementioned loa. notices were issued by the ..... contending that suez environment and degremont (a french company) had purchased shares of respondent no.2 and, therefore, respondent no.2 was no longer a small or medium enterprise since it was a part of a multinational corporation. it was submitted that suez environment and degremont is a 15 billion business group.14. this ..... vibhu bakhru, j the petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, 1. impugning an order dated 16.06.2016 passed by respondent no.1 (the micro and small enterprises facilitation council hereafter the council ), whereby the petitioner and respondent no.2 (driplex water engineering ltd.) were referred to arbitration under the aegis of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... jmc projects india ltd. v. mechtech engineers, manu/gj/0642/2011, union of india v. ekta telecommunications system, manu/jh/0356/2013, in which the award of interest under micro small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 has been upheld. it is submitted that under section 31(7) of the arbitration and conciliation act, the interest can be awarded under the special enactments ..... petitioners contentions on merits cannot be looked into. however, considering the high rate of interest awarded by the learned arbitrator under interest on delayed payments to small scale and ancillary industrial undertakings act, 1993 and micro small and medium enterprises development act, 2006, this court called upon both the parties to make submissions on justification of the high rate of interest awarded by the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... petition.13. to hold otherwise, would infact run counter to the mandate of the msmed act. the msmed act being a special legislation dealing with the micro, small and medium enterprises, would certainly have precedence over the general law, that is the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996.14. i may also note that the petitioner has ..... konkan region, thane, maharashtra o.m.p.(comm.) no.144/2019 page 1 (hereinafter referred to as the msme council ) under the provisions of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the msmed act ).2. at the outset, it was put to the learned senior counsel for the petitioner ..... in sub-section (1) of section 7 of that act. (4) notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the micro and small enterprises facilitation council or the centre providing alternate dispute resolution services shall have jurisdiction to act as an arbitrator or conciliator under this section in a dispute .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... however not accepted. the iocl apparently awarded the contract to the successful l1 bidder.3. mr. raman gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 (hereinafter msmed act ) enactment, in fact, applies to the circumstances of the case. he has placed reliance upon the central government ..... bidders, especially clause 13, were not clear. the main part of the condition stood deleted; yet the surviving conditions contained a reference to the bids by micro, small and medium manufacturing enterprises ( msme ).2. apparently, on 24.07.2014 a pre-bid meeting was organised by the iocl in which the petitioner participated. thereafter on ..... yet not certain. w.p.(c) 6001/2018 page 4 of 5 6. furthermore, the obligation cast upon the central government undoubtedly is to promote micro and small enterprises; yet at the same time, the central government is enabled to take a broad sectoral approach. having regard to these facts and the iocl s .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... contract will be in the jurisdiction of delhi courts. 3. disputes having arisen between the parties, the respondent approached the haryana micro and small enterprises facilitation council under the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006(hereinafter referred to as the msmed act ).4. the facilitation council started conciliation proceedings under section 18(2 ..... of the counsel for the petitioner on the judgment of the bombay high court in m/s steel authority of india ltd. & anr. vs. micro, small enterprise facilitation council air2012bom 178 is ill-founded. the bombay high court in the said judgment was answering a submission made before it that where there ..... of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the act ) seeking a declaration that the arbitrator appointed by the haryana micro and small enterprises facilitation council vide letter dated 16.08.2017 is de jure unable to perform his functions and for appointment of the arbitral tribunal in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... , while issuing notice on 20.09.2017, issued the following directions:-" ..........the petitioner s grievance in this case is that the respondents have not adhered to the provisions of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 as well as policy framed under it, particularly paragraphs no.3, 6 & 11. it is contended that the tender/nit issued for procurement of 2179 ..... be made to emergency procurement in accordance with the prevailing policy and guidelines. he also submits that the provisions of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006, requiring a portion of the tender to be set aside for a micro, small and medium (msm) enterprise would be adhered to.3. it is also stated that a re-tender was initiated (vide rfp no.62901 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... 20% of the target of annual procurement from mses in stipulated manner is to be earmarked. it is contended that given the right of micro medium and small enterprises (mmse) like the petitioner, under section 11 of the micro, small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the act ) as well as the industrial policies framed under it, the tendency of most public ..... untenable in law. learned counsel refers to the letter of 18.12.2017 of the department of industrial policy and promotion, ministry of commerce & industry, highlighting that the grievance of micro medium small enterprises with respect to selective interpretation of the msme policies (which the petitioner claims to have entitlement under), need to be addressed and that directions had to be issued to .....
Tag this Judgment!