GUWAHATI, India, Dec. 19 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Nov. 19:
1. Heard Ms. N. Saikia, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. G. Das, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Canara Bank and Mr. B. Chakraborty, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Railway Administration.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction upon the respondent Canara Bank for release of the fixed deposit amounting to Rs.45,85,000/- with renewable interest at three times the bank rate as per Section 16 of the MSME Act, 2006.
3. It has been submitted at the bar that pursuant to various litigations filed before this Court, an arbitration proceedings is presently going on between the petitioner and the respondent Railways.
4. It is the opinion of this Court that if such arbitration proceedings are going on, it would not be in the interest of justice for this Court to entertain this present writ petition. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the Act of 1996') seeking appropriate interim directions, if so advised.
5. Accordingly, this Court, therefore, dismisses the instant writ petition on the ground of being not entertained. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the Arbitral Tribunal or the Court under Section 2 (e) of the Act of 1996 seeking interim directions, if so advised.
6. It is observed for the sake of clarity that this Court has not decided about the entitlement of the petitioner. It shall be absolutely with the domain of the appropriate forum to decide whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief(s) sought for.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
