NBCC (INDIA) LTD. versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS

NBCC (INDIA) LTD. versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS

Section 18 of the MSMED Act, 2006 is not restricted to a registered "supplier" and the expression "any party to a dispute" is deliberate and open-ended; filing a memorandum under Section 8 by micro and small enterprises is discretionary and therefore lack of registration before contract execution is not a mandatory bar to making a reference under Section 18. Silpi Industries and Mahakali Foods did not decide the narrow issue before this Court and are distinguishable; for clarity and legal certainty the appeal is referred to a three Judge Bench for authoritative pronouncement.

Parties
Appellant: NBCC (India) Ltd.; Respondent: The State of West Bengal & Ors.; Respondent: M/s Saket Infra Developers Private Limited
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court; Matter Referred to a Three Judge Bench for Authoritative Pronouncement
Outcome
Appeal referred to a three Judge Bench for authoritative pronouncement
Legal Topics
Section 18, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Section 8, Registration/memorandum Under MSMED Act, Jurisdiction of Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Precedent and Article 141 Implications, Effect of Prior Contracts and Date of Supply
Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (msme) Law Arbitration Law Statutory Interpretation Constitutional Remedies / Access to Justice Civil Procedure Section 18, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 Section 8, Registration/memorandum Under MSMED Act, 2006 Jurisdiction of Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NBCC (India) Ltd.

Appellant

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Respondent

M/s Saket Infra Developers Private Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court; Matter Referred to a Three Judge Bench for Authoritative Pronouncement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an MSME that did not file a memorandum under Section 8 before execution of the contract can make a reference under Section 18 of the MSMED Act, 2006
  2. 2 Whether the phrase "any party to a dispute" in Section 18 is confined to a "supplier" as defined in Section 2(n) and therefore limited to enterprises registered under Section 8 prior to contract
  3. 3 Whether precedents such as Silpi Industries and Mahakali Foods govern the present issue

Ratio Decidendi

Section 18 of the MSMED Act, 2006 is not restricted to a registered "supplier" and the expression "any party to a dispute" is deliberate and open-ended; filing a memorandum under Section 8 by micro and small enterprises is discretionary and therefore lack of registration before contract execution is not a mandatory bar to making a reference under Section 18. Silpi Industries and Mahakali Foods did not decide the narrow issue before this Court and are distinguishable; for clarity and legal certainty the appeal is referred to a three Judge Bench for authoritative pronouncement.

Court Disposition

Appeal referred to a three Judge Bench for authoritative pronouncement

Orders

  • Registry directed to place the appeal paperbooks along with the detailed judgment before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constitution of an appropriate Bench
  • Matter referred to a three Judge Bench