{"id":351318,"date":"2025-06-24T09:00:51","date_gmt":"2025-06-24T03:30:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=351318"},"modified":"2025-06-30T10:10:21","modified_gmt":"2025-06-30T04:40:21","slug":"del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> In a petition for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (\u2018Arbitration Act\u2019), a Single Judge bench of Jyoti Singh, J*<\/span>, held that the statutory mechanism given under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises and Development Act, 2006 (\u2018MSMED Act\u2019) is not a mandatory provision. However, once the party invokes the jurisdiction, the mechanism for dispute resolution provided in Section 18 will come into play and the party cannot abandon the procedure and seek appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11 of Arbitration Act.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The petitioner is registered as a Micro Enterprise in Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises and is governed by the MSMED Act. The respondent placed a purchase order with the petitioner for purchase of SAP Business One License and its implementation on the terms mentioned in the Agreement. The respondents defaulted on payment for invoices and unlawfully terminated in the license.<\/p>\n

The petitioners, in accordance with Clause 14.1 of the Agreement, sent a legal notice invoking arbitration. Upon respondent\u2019s refusal of the notice, the petitioners filed the present petition which is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator. The preliminary objection raised by the respondents was on the grounds of maintainability. The respondents contended that the petitioners must take recourse of the dispute resolution mechanism under Section 18 of the MSMED Act and cannot invoke arbitration under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act.<\/p>\n

The primary issue for consideration was whether it is mandatory to invoke Section 18 of the MSMED Act when Section 11 of the Arbitration Act has already been invoked.<\/p>\n

The counsel for respondents argued that MSMED Act is a special Act and the Arbitration Act is a general Act. Applying the legal principle of generalia specialibus non derogant<\/span>, the special law must prevail over the general law. Therefore, the mechanism provided under Section 18 of the MSMED Act must take precedence over Section 11 of the Arbitration Act.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/h3>\n

Rejecting the respondent\u2019s contention, the Court opined that where proceedings under Section 18 are not pending, parties with disputes arising out of commercial relationships were not precluded from invoking arbitration proceedings. Evaluating the scheme of the MSMED Act, the Court explained that Section 17 and 18 of the MSMED Act must be read conjointly. Section 17 provides that the buyer shall be liable to make payment with interest for goods and services rendered by the supplier. Section 18 entitles a person to refer the matter to the Micro and Small, Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council (\u2018MSEFC\u2019) when default under Section 17 occurs. On receipt of reference, MSEFC shall either conduct mediation proceedings itself or refer the matter to any institution. Where mediation is not successful, MSEFC shall either take up arbitration itself or refer the dispute to an arbitration institution. Once the dispute enters into arbitration, the provisions of the Arbitration Act become applicable.<\/p>\n

The Court further opined that the provisions of Section 18 cannot be construed to mean that once dispute under Section 17 arises, the parties must mandatorily take recourse to the dispute resolution mechanism envisaged under Section 18(1). The Court stated that the legislature in its wisdom has used the word \u2018may\u2019 in Section 18(1), which indicates that the intent of the legislature was to leave it to the discretion of the aggrieved party to either take recourse to Section 18 of MSME Act or to resort to procedure under Arbitration Act. In cases where agreements between parties allow for a specific method of dispute resolution, the parties may choose to invoke that instead of making a reference to MSEFC.<\/p>\n

The Court reiterated the position laid down by the Supreme Court in Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. v. Mahakali Foods (P) Ltd.<\/span> 2023 6 SCC 401<\/a>, that once the statutory mechanism under Section 18(1) of the MSMED Act has been triggered, it would override any agreement between the parties. The non-obstante clause in Section 18(1) and (4) would take effect and preclude the parties from invoking any other mechanism until the mechanism under Section 18 is taken to its logical conclusion. However, where the mechanism under Section 18 is not invoked, the parties may resort to any other mechanism for resolution of their disputes.<\/p>\n

In the present case, since statutory mechanism under Section 18 of the MSMED Act had not been invoked, therefore, it could not be said that any proceedings were pending before the Council. Thus, the application for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act was allowed. Accordingly, the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) was instructed to take steps for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator.<\/p>\n

[Total Application Software Co. (P) Ltd. v. Ashoka Distillers and Chemicals (P) Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine Del 4562<\/a>, decided on 27-5-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgement authored by- Justice Jyoti Singh<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Petitioner:<\/span> K.S. Negi, Nikhil Rajput, Advocates<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Vinita Sasidharan, Vasu Vats Aadya Malik, Advocates<\/p>\n

Buy Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u00a0 HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Once the mechanism under MSME Act is triggered by any party, the procedure has to be taken to its logical end. However, once there is no trigger by invoking the jurisdiction of the Council, party cannot be precluded from resorting to any other mechanism for resolution of its disputes.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[24904,3226,2543,37235,71166,60215,51198],"class_list":["post-351318","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-appointment-of-arbitrator","tag-arbitration","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-dispute-resolution","tag-justice-jyoti-singh","tag-msefc","tag-msmed-act"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC on interplay b\/w MSMED Act and Arbitration | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court discusses interplay between MSMED Act and Arbitration Act.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court discusses interplay between MSMED Act and Arbitration Act.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-24T03:30:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-06-30T04:40:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-24T03:30:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-30T04:40:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":830,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Appointment of arbitrator\",\"Arbitration\",\"Delhi High Court\",\"Dispute Resolution\",\"Justice Jyoti Singh\",\"MSEFC\",\"MSMED Act\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC on interplay b\\\/w MSMED Act and Arbitration | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-24T03:30:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-30T04:40:21+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court discusses interplay between MSMED Act and Arbitration Act.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/24\\\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC on interplay b\/w MSMED Act and Arbitration | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court discusses interplay between MSMED Act and Arbitration Act.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator","og_description":"Delhi High Court discusses interplay between MSMED Act and Arbitration Act.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-06-24T03:30:51+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-06-30T04:40:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator","datePublished":"2025-06-24T03:30:51+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-30T04:40:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/"},"wordCount":830,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","keywords":["Appointment of arbitrator","Arbitration","Delhi High Court","Dispute Resolution","Justice Jyoti Singh","MSEFC","MSMED Act"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/","name":"Del HC on interplay b\/w MSMED Act and Arbitration | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-06-24T03:30:51+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-30T04:40:21+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Delhi High Court discusses interplay between MSMED Act and Arbitration Act.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/24\/del-hc-interplay-b-w-msmed-act-arbitration\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi HC: Invoking S.18 of MSMED Act for dispute resolution not mandatory, but once invoked, party cannot seek appointment of arbitrator"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":277264,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/11\/supreme-court-msmed-act-2006-has-an-overriding-effect-over-the-provisions-of-the-arbitration-act-1996-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":351318,"position":0},"title":"Supreme Court| Existence of arbitration agreement does not bar reference to Facilitation Council; MSMED Act has an overriding effect over the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1996","author":"Editor","date":"November 11, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Supreme Court: The division bench of Uday Umesh Lalit, C.J. and Bela M. Trivedi*, J. has held that the provisions of Chapter-V of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (\u2018 MSMED Act\u2019) have an overriding effect over the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-236-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-236-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-236-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-236-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-236-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":292770,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/22\/calcutta-high-court-appointment-arbitrator-pendency-reference-msme-facilitation-council-contrary-to-msmed-act-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351318,"position":1},"title":"Appointment of Arbitrator during pendency of reference before MSME Facilitation Council is contrary to MSMED Act: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"May 22, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201c\u2026being a special statute the MSMED Act will have an overriding effect vis-\u00e0-vis the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":321368,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/04\/del-hc-dismisses-section11-arbitration-petition-due-arbitration-proceedings-under-msme-act-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":351318,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court dismisses S. 11 Arbitration petition due to Debit Notes issued after MSMED registration in arbitration proceedings","author":"Arunima","date":"May 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"MSMED Act is a beneficial legislation for Micro Small & Medium Enterprises and provides that a buyer can also raise counter claims before the statutory arbitrator under the MSMED Act. Moreover, the scope of the Act as stated therein is to the extent that even if there is an agreement\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":305053,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/17\/bombay-high-court-denied-appointment-arbitrator-dispute-against-msme\/","url_meta":{"origin":351318,"position":3},"title":"Bombay High Court denies appointment of arbitrator for dispute against MSME","author":"Ridhi","date":"October 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court held the instant applications under Section 11 of Arbitration Act as non-maintainable and dismissed the said applications.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"bombay high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":278787,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/30\/jharkhand-high-court-legal-research-legal-update-arbitration-conciliation-act-1996-section-116-section-152-section-21\/","url_meta":{"origin":351318,"position":4},"title":"Jharkhand High Court | Maintainability of application under S. 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of substitute arbitrator","author":"Editor","date":"November 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Jharkhand High Court: While allowing the application under Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) for appointment of substitute arbitrator, a single judge bench of Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. held that since first arbitrator was appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act after the applicant\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Jharkhand High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image38-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":286933,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/18\/unilateral-appointment-of-arbitrator-whether-absolute-prohibition-contrary-to-the-scheme-of-the-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":351318,"position":5},"title":"Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrator \u2014 Whether Absolute Prohibition Contrary to the Scheme of the Act?","author":"Editor","date":"March 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by Prashant Tripathi\u2020 and Sanjeev Singh\u2020\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-775.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-775.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-775.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-775.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351318","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=351318"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/351318\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=351318"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=351318"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=351318"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}