M/S SHINE PLAST v. M/S TAMIL NADU TEXTBOOK
Case at a glance
- Bench
- D K SINGH, S RACHAIAH, RATHNAKALA
- Neutral citation
- 2026:KHC:10359-DB
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. We are of the opinion, that against the said impugned order dated 03.01.2026 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, the writ petition is not maintainable and the petitioner may take recourse to the appropriate remedy under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996…
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 2808 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. M/S SHINE PLAST REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI MOHAMMED ASHRAF T.M AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS CURRENTLY RESIDING AT AI-RUBIYAT TC.6/3219, UG-155, ULOOR GARDEN ULOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM KERALA 695011 …PETITIONER Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. SANDEEP K., ADVOCATE) AND:
M/S TAMIL NADU TEXTBOOK AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION (GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU ), NO. 68, E.V.K SAMPATH MAALIGAI COLLEGE ROAD, CHENNAI-600006 TAMIL NADU …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, CALLING FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE ORDER DATED 03.01.2026 PASSED BY - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:10359-DB WP No. 2808 of 2026 HC-KAR THE SOLE ARBITRATOR, SMT. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA, IN A.C. NO. 446/2022. ANNEXURE A, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present writ petition has been filed impugning the order dated 03.01.2026 passed by the Sole Arbitrator Smt. Justice Rathnakala, Former Judge of this Court in Arbitration Case No.446/2022.
The petitioner filed the claim petition before the Arbitral Tribunal in respect of the contract entered into between the petitioner and the respondent vide tender Ref. No.1030/C1/2018 dated 06.04.2018.
The respondent filed its objection to the claim petition assailing the claim of the claimant/petitioner on two legal grounds a) limitation and b) jurisdiction. In this regard an application I.A.No.1 was filed under Section 16 - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:10359-DB WP No. 2808 of 2026 HC-KAR of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, After claimant filed the evidence by way of examination-in-chief of its witness, the respondent filed I.A.No.3 requesting to hear I.A.No.1 before proceeding with the evidence.
The Arbitral Tribunal vide impugned order dated
03.01.2026 has held that the claimant was not a 'supplier' within the definition of Section 2(n) of the Micro Small/Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short 'the Act'). Therefore, the claim raised by the claimant/petitioner in respect of Tender No.RC 15/C1/2015 dated 16.07.2015 would not come within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
We are of the opinion, that against the said impugned order dated 03.01.2026 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, the writ petition is not maintainable and the petitioner may take recourse to the appropriate remedy under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as may be available to it under the law. However, the public law remedy is not available to - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:10359-DB WP No. 2808 of 2026 HC-KAR challenge the impugned order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. Therefore, we dismiss the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner as stated above. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NG CT: SH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.