Karnataka High Court
Vayam Technologies Limited vs Kalki Communication Technologies Pvt. ... on 9 November, 2017
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari
1/6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 09th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
C.M.P. No.163/2017
BETWEEN:
VAYAM TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATE UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT 1956
AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT "THAPAR HOUSE" 124, JANPATH
NEW DELHI-110001.
THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
SHRI JAI SHANKAR SHUKLA
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CAPTAIN ARVIND SHARMA, ADV.,)
AND:
KALKI COMMUNICATION TECHNOLIGIES PVT. LTD.
THROUGH ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
2ND FLOOR, # 147, 5TH MAIN, 7TH SECTOR
HSR LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560034
PRESENTLY HAVING OFFICE AT
NO.17/1, "THE ADDRESS"
4TH FLOOR, OUTER RING ROAD
KADUBEESANAHALLI, BANGALORE-560103.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. I.S. DEVAIAH, ADV., FOR SRI. K.S. DEVARAJ, ADV.,)
THIS C.M.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(4)(b) OF THE
ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO (i)
REFER THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE
RESPONDENT HAVING ARISEN IN RESPECT OF THE PURCHASE
Date of Order 09-11-2017 C.M.P.No.163/2017
Vayam Technologies Limited Vs.
Kalki Communication Technoligies Pvt. Ltd.
2/6
ORDER DATED 07/08/2012, TO THE ARBITRATION CENTRE
KARNATAKA, 'KHANIJA BHAVANA', 49, 3RD FLOOR, EAST WING,
RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560001, KARNATAKA,
INDIA, FOR ARBITRATION. (ii) AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND
FURTHER RELIEFS AS THE HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT
INCLUDING COSTS OF THIS PROCEEDING.
THIS C.M.P. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Mr. Captain Arvind Sharma, Adv. for Petitioner Mr. I.S. Devaiah, Adv., for Mr. K.S. Devaraj, Adv. for Respondent
1. Heard the learned counsels.
2. An arbitrable dispute admittedly exists between the parties and also a valid Arbitration Agreement exists.
3. The parties were before the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC) under the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, finally the said MSEF Council in its 108th Meeting held in Case No.37/2016 on 03.11.2017 has referred the matter to the Karnataka Date of Order 09-11-2017 C.M.P.No.163/2017 Vayam Technologies Limited Vs. Kalki Communication Technoligies Pvt. Ltd. 3/6 Arbitration Centre, Bengaluru, for arbitration. The said order is quoted before for ready reference:-
"108th MSEFC hearing dated 03.11.2017 Case No.37/2016 Case called.
Advocate for both Petitioner and
Respondent are present. Both the parties
submitted that the conciliation in the matter has failed and the matter now needs arbitration. Advocate for Petitioner submits that being a MSME, they have approached Council on the subject of delay in payment under provisions of MSMED Act, 2006. They submit that MSMED Act 2006 is a special legislation for the benefits of MSMEs and Section 18(4) specifically contain a non-obstante clause empowering the Facilitation Council to act as an Arbitrator. Further, Section 24 of the Act states that section 15 to 23 shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. He further submitted that in case they are deprived of an opportunity to seek relief through MSEF Council under MSMED Act 2006, they would be put to financial loss as the benefit of interest on delayed payment and the pre deposit of 75% of the award amount as Date of Order 09-11-2017 C.M.P.No.163/2017 Vayam Technologies Limited Vs. Kalki Communication Technoligies Pvt. Ltd.4/6
prescribed under the MSMED Act 2006 would not be available to them. Per contra, Counsel for Respondent States that as there is an independent arbitration agreement and Arbitration clause has already been invoked, it may be appropriate to proceed with the matter as per the Arbitration clause outside the purview of MSMED Act 2006. Matter was discussed in detail by the MSEF Council. It is seen that the Arbitration proceedings under MSMED Act 2006 provide special relief to the MSME. After due deliberations, the Council felt that in case Council does not proceed with the matter as per the MSMED Act 2006, the Petitioner MSME would be deprived of the financial benefits as envisaged under the MSMED Act 2006 which they are otherwise entitled to.
In view of the above, the Council decided to refer the matter to the Karnataka Arbitration Centre, Bangalore for arbitration.
Sd/-
03/11/2017 Commissioner,Industrial Development & Director, Industries & Commerce Department Bangalore".
Date of Order 09-11-2017 C.M.P.No.163/2017 Vayam Technologies Limited Vs. Kalki Communication Technoligies Pvt. Ltd. 5/6
4. From the panel of the Arbitrators maintained by the said Arbitration Centre, Bengaluru, both the learned counsels have agreed for the appointment of Mr.Justice Anand Byrareddy, a Former Judge of this Court, to act as an Arbitrator in the present case to resolve the dispute between the parties under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as per the Rules, in the Arbitration Centre at Bangalore.
5. The present petition is accordingly disposed of under Section 11 of the Act by appointing Mr.Justice Anand Byrareddy, Former Judge of this Court to act as an Arbitrator in the present case.
All the contentions and claims/counter claims on merits by both the parties are kept open, to be determined by the learned Arbitrator.
A copy of this order be sent to the Arbitration Centre, Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru, for proceeding further in the matter, on administrative side and also to Date of Order 09-11-2017 C.M.P.No.163/2017 Vayam Technologies Limited Vs. Kalki Communication Technoligies Pvt. Ltd. 6/6 Mr.Justice Anand Byrareddy, on the address available with the said Arbitration Centre, Bengaluru.
Sd/-
JUDGE Srl.