Michael Zothankhuma JUDGMENT
Michael Zothankhuma, J.
1. Heard Mr. A. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Nandi for the respondent No. 3. Dr. B. Ahmed appears for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2. The petitioner has prayed for setting aside the extract of the meeting minutes of the Micro & Small Enterprise Facilitation Council held on 12.03.2018, in the office chamber of the Commissioner of Industries & Commerce, Assam, by which the petitioner has been directed to make payment of the Principal & Local Freight Charges with interest to the respondent No. 3.
3. The petitioner's counsel submits that the respondent No. 3 is a Small Scale Industrial Unit, who had supplied materials to the petitioner.
4. The respondent No. 3 thereafter, made a claim against the petitioner for realisation of unpaid dues, which are as follows:-
"(a) For realisation of Rs. 23,968/- being the principal amount for materials supplied to the defendants.
(b) Rs. 33,199.30 being the price of escalation,
(c) Rs. 18,060.23 being the local freight charges,
(d) Rs. 14,06,052.48 being the interest upto 31-07-2000 as per the provisions contained in the interest on Delayed payment to a Small Scale and Ancillary Undertaking Act, 1992 and also for pendente lite and future interest."
5. The respondent No. 3 thereafter, filed a money suit in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Guwahati which was registered as Money Suit No. 192/2000, claiming payment of unpaid dues from the petitioner. The same was dismissed vide Judgment & Order dated 12.07.2007. The respondent No. 3 thereafter, filed an appeal before this Court, which was registered as RFA No. 13/2008. The same was dismissed vide Judgment & Order dated 26.06.2015.
6. The respondent No. 3 thereafter, filed a claim petition before the Micro & Small Enterprise Facilitation Council claiming payment of unpaid dues.
7. The Micro & Small Enterprise Facilitation Council (hereinafter referred to as the Council), directed payment of Principal & Local Freight Charges with interest payable by the petitioner to the respondent No. 3, vide its meeting minutes held on 12.03.2018 in the office chamber of the Commissioner of Industries & Commerce, Assam.
8. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of unpaid dues having been rejected by the learned Trial Court and this Court vide Money Suit No. 192/2000 and RFA No. 13/2008, the respondent No. 3 could not have re-agitated the same issue before the Council under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 2006 Act). He submits that the Council did not facilitate any conciliation between the parties, though an attempt for the same had been made. Also the provisions of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 not having been applied, the issuance of a direction for payment of money by the Council in favour of the respondent No. 3 and against the petitioner is in excess of the jurisdiction of the Council. He accordingly prays for setting aside the direction passed by the Council in its meeting minutes dated 12.03.2018, held in the office chamber of the Commissioner of Industries & Commerce, Assam.
9. The counsels for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 submit that there is no infirmity with the decision taken by the Council, as the power of the Council to decide an issue under the 2006 Act has not been limited by rejection of the claim of the respondent No. 3 by the Civil Courts.
10. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
11. The claim of the respondent No. 3 for payment of his alleged unpaid dues having been rejected by the Trial Court and this Court in Money Suit No. 192/2000 and RFA No. 13/2008, the respondent No. 3 has approached the Council under the 2006 Act. Section 18 of the 2006 Act provides for an arbitration proceeding ........