HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.22901, 22902 and 23041 OF 2009 DATED 24TH SEPTEMBER, 2014.
BETWEEN M/s. Fabricon Pvt. Limited, Ghatkesar, RR District, Rep. by its Managing Director Muralidhar Rao Kanneganti …….Petitioner in WPs 22902 and 23041 of 2009 M/s. Shivani Engineering Industries, Hyderabad Rep. by its Partner Murilidhar Rao Kanneganti ….Petitioner in WP.No. 22901 of 2009 And The Andhra Pradesh Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Centre, O/o. Commissioner of Industries Chirag-Ali-Lane, Hyderabad and anr …Respondents in WPs.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.22901, 22902 and 23041 OF 2009
COMMON ORDER:
Inasmuch as the subject matter of these Writ Petitions is one and the same, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
These Writ Petitions are filed challenging the orders dated 17.01.2009 passed by the first respondent in rejecting the claims of the petitioners.
The petitioners are small scale industries and are registered with the competent authority. They are engaged in the business of undertaking bus body building. The second respondent herein is a major industry which used to place orders for bus body building on the petitioners and other like businesses. Earlier the second respondent placed orders with the petitioners based on the quotations called for, for bus body building. The contract between the parties is that the chassis of the bus would be supplied by the second respondent and the bus body would be built by the petitioners. There arose some disputes between the petitioners and second respondent in respect of those works. In respect of those disputes, certain claims were raised and when the petitioners submitted their claims to the second respondent, the second respondent did not consider the same. In these circumstances the petitioners sought arbitration proceedings under the provisions of the Interest on Delayed Payment to Small Scale & Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993. While the applications of the petitioners are pending, the said Act was repealed and new Act called as Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 came into force. The second respondent remained ex par t e before the first respondent. After prolonged and protracted proceedings for a period of more than five years, the first respondent passed orders on 17.01.2009 rejecting the claims of the petitioners on the ground that some of the claims are barred by limitation and some of the claims are beyond the jurisdiction of the first respondent. Challenging the said orders, the present Writ Petitions are filed.
The learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the first respondent should have entertained the claims of the petitioners and in respect of the claims+ where no jurisdiction exists and where claims are barred by limitation, the first respondent should have indicated reasons therefor. The action of the first respondent in rejecting the claims in toto of the petitioners holding them outside its purview is illegal. It is also submitted that the observation of the first respondent that the petitioners should have approached the Civil Court is also vitiated under law.
On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent submitted that The Interest on Delayed Payment to Small Scale & Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 came into force on 23.09.1992 and in respect of the claims prior to 23.09.1992, the first respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain the same. He also submitted that they are not amenable to the jurisdiction of the first respondent.
In view of the above diverse submissions, it is not necessary for this Court to deal with various claims preferred by the petitioners. The learned Government Pleader relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Assam Small Scale Industrial Development Corporation Limited Vs. M/s., J.D. Pharmaceuticals (AIR 2006 SC 121) in respect of his contention that the transactions entered into by the parties prior to the commencement of The Interest on Delayed Payment to Small Scale & Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993, i.e. prior to 23.09.1992, the provisions of the said Act are not attracted. This position is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners.
The learned Government Pleader also submitted that by invocation of jurisdiction of the first respondent, remedy of approaching the Civil Court is not barred.
But it is clear that the choice is left open to the petitioners and when they want to invoke the jurisdiction of the first respondent, the can do so and the first respondent cannot direct the petitioners to invoke the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. The first respondent can independently decide each of the claims submitted by the petitioners in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court read with Act 2006 and come to a conclusion. In the circumstances, the impugned orders passed by the first respondent are set aside and the matter is remanded to the first respondent for considering the matters afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to both sides and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Writ Petitions are allowed to the extent indicated above. Miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any in the Writ Petitions shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO DATED 24TH SEPTEMBER, 2014.
Msnro The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO DATED 22ND SEPTEMBER, 2014.
Msnro