MSMED Act Overrides Arbitration Act In MSME Cases; 75% Pre-Deposit To Challenge Award Mandatory: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has held that in arbitration under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, while the procedure is governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, key substantive provisions such as the mandatory 75% pre-deposit for challenging an award will prevail in case of conflict. The court clarified that only those provisions of the Arbitration Act apply which are not inconsistent with the MSMED Act. Justice Abdul Quddhose observed that "MSMED Act is a...

State Cannot Defer MSME Payments Once Work Is Completed; Funds Shortage No Defence: J&K&L High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has recently held that under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises framework, once execution of work is admitted, the State and its instrumentalities cannot defer their obligation to make payment on the plea of paucity of funds or administrative approval. A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed, “Once the execution of work is admitted, the obligation to make payment stands crystallized and cannot be deferred on the plea of paucity of funds...

Article 226 Can Be Invoked Against Non Est MSME Award Violating Statutory Provisions: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on 2 April, held that a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable against an award passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council when such award is non est in law and contrary to mandatory statutory provisions. Justice S.G. Chapalgaonkar observed that where an impugned award is passed in violation of the mandatory provisions of the MSMED Act, 2006 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it cannot be treated as a valid arbitral award in the...

Madras High Court Rejects MSME's Interest Claim Under MSMED Act In Absence Of Contract

The Madras High Court has dismissed an MSME's claim for interest under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, holding that such interest cannot be awarded where the claim arises as compensation under Section 70 of the Contract Act and not from a contractual debt Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, in a judgment delivered on April 01, 2026, held that, “In any event, the plaintiff cannot claim interest on compounded basis with monthly rests, whether by invoking Section 16 of...

Amounts Deposited Pursuant To Court Orders Remain Assets Of The Corporate Debtor: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on 6 April held that amounts deposited in Court under judicial orders remain assets of the corporate debtor, even if they arise from encashment of a bank guarantee after the commencement of insolvency proceedings. A Division Bench of Justices Anil L. Pansare and Nivedita P. Mehta directed the release of the deposited amount to the Resolution Professional of Morarjee Textiles Ltd, rejecting the claim of D.C. Weaving Mills Pvt Ltd, which had sought withdrawal of the amount...

Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Denial Of Interest Subsidy To MSME Despite Grant Of Power Subsidy Under WBIS 2013

The Calcutta High Court has set aside the West Bengal government's decision denying interest subsidy to Hooghly Extrusions Ltd., an MSME holding that once a unit is found eligible under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 2013 and granted one component of benefit, denial of another on technical grounds defeats the scheme's object.Allowing the writ petition, Justice Rai Chattopadhyay quashed the State's order dated February 22, 2019 and directed authorities to disburse the interest subsidy within...

Conciliation Under MSMED Act Is Mandatory, Cannot Be Waived By Parties: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on 27 February held that the statutory mandate of conciliation under Section 18(2) of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 cannot be waived by a party to proceedings before the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council. A Division Bench of Justice Anil K Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S allowed a writ appeal filed by Malabar Social Service and Sanitation (MASSS) and set aside the judgment of the Single Judge which had quashed an award...

MSME Revival Benefits Depend On Loan Limit, Not Outstanding Dues: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court recently held that eligibility for benefits under the Reserve Bank of India's framework for revival and rehabilitation of MSMEs depends on the sanctioned loan limit and not on the outstanding amount. The court, thus, cleared the way for Union Bank of India to continue insolvency proceedings against Vardhan Agro Processing Limited. A Division Bench of Justice Manish Pitale and Justice Shreeram V. Shirsat heard the case. While explaining the scope of the RBI framework, the...

Banks Must Examine MSME Restructuring Claims Before Proceeding Under SARFAESI: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has recently held that once an MSME borrower raises a restructuring claim in reply to a SARFAESI demand notice, the bank cannot carry on with recovery proceedings without first taking a decision under the RBI's revival framework. Justice Krishna Rao said the obligation on the bank is mandatory when such a claim is made with reasons and an affidavit. “It is mandatory on the part of the bank that, in reply, if the borrower claims benefit of the FRAMEWORK with reasons...

Delhi High Court Orders Deutsche Bank To Refund Rs 3.45 Crore To MSME Exporter

The Delhi High Court has ordered Deutsche Bank to refund Rs 3.45 crore to an MSME exporter, M D Overseas Private Limited. The court held that the bank wrongly recovered interest subvention benefits that had already been given upfront under the Interest Equalization Scheme. A single-judge bench of Justice Amit Bansal said the bank's move defeated the purpose of the scheme. The scheme, the court noted, was meant to "enhance the global competitiveness of Indian exports by lowering the cost of...

Pendency Of Conciliation Proceedings Under MSME Act Does Not Bar Interim Relief U/S 9 Of A&C Act To Preserve Subject Matter: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court has held that pendency of conciliation proceedings does not bar the grant of limited interim relief under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act"), where such relief is essential to preserve the subject matter of the dispute. Justice Gaurang Kanth held while allowing a Section 9 application filed by Rishi Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. (“Petitioner”), appointing a Special Officer to inspect, measure, and document the existing status...

Writ Petition Filed To Bypass Pre-Deposit Requirement Under MSMED Act Is Not Maintainable: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court dismissed a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an award passed by the West Bengal Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC), holding that the petition was not maintainable and was filed to evade pre-deposit requirement under section 19 of the MSMED Act, 2006. Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya held that the Facilitation Council had jurisdiction to entertain the reference under section 18 and the buyer (Kommoners Club...