You may also like...
-
COMMON JUDGMENT D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARHY, J. The petitioner is an association registered under the Societies Therefore, the present Writ Appeal and Writ Petitions are dismissed and we reiterate the earlier judgment in W.A.No.2895 of 2019, dated 28.08.2019. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, considering the fact that already in the earlier round, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/was imposed as costs, we refrain from imposing exemplary costs on the petitioner. Consequently, C.M.P.No.2516 of 2022, W.M.P.Nos.12202 of 2021 and 3619 of 2021 are closed. (M.N.B., CJ) (D.B.C., J.) For Appellant : Mr.S.Selva Thirumurugan For Respondents : Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Counsel for Mr.Rahul Balaji, for R1 : M/s. Ramalingam & Associates, for R2 : Mrs.M.Sneha, for R3 In W.P.No.11467 of 2021 For Petitioner : Mr.S.Selva Thirumurugan For Respondents : Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, Central Government Senior Panel Counsel for R1 : Mr.P.Muthukumar, State Government Pleader for RR-4 and 8 : Ms.Shubharanjani Ananth, Standing Counsel for RR-2 and 3
by Sekar Reporter · Published August 18, 2022
-
Such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that as the dispute itself is not resolved by MSEF Council, only the matter has been referred to Arbitration with the consent of the parties, further the contract governing the parties also provides for such reference to arbitration, the second respondent has also already invoked the Arbitration Clause by issuing notice in the year 2013 itself and the petitioner has also participated in the said arbitration proceedings, now the petitioner cannot challenge the impugned order at this belated stage that to when the arbitration proceedings is in the final stage. Further, when the parties have consciously agreed to resolve the dispute arising out of the contract by way of arbitration, they can very well agitate their right before the Arbitrator and canvass their points and no prejudice would be caused to them since the Arbitrator has been independently appointed by the Arbitration Center of the Madras High Court. Such view of the matter, this Court finds no merit in this writ petition and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 03.01.2023 Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No kk To The Chairman, Micro Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Represented by its Regional Joint Director of Industries and Commerce, Thiru-vi-ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. The Hon’ble Presiding Arbitrator, Madras High Court Arbitration Centre, High Court, Parry’s Corner, George Town, Chennai – 600 108. N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. kk W.P.No.6216 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.6834 of 2021 03.01.2023
by Sekar Reporter · Published January 7, 2023
-
S. Prabakaran Bci vice chairman full speech in goa function
by Sekar Reporter · Published June 12, 2022
