✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 28 Apr 2026

Panchanan International Private Limited v. District Level Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Ludhiana

Case Details Punjab & Haryana High Court · 28 Apr 2026
Court
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Case No.
Cwp No. 12843 of 2026
Decided
28 Apr 2026
Length
1,055 words

Acts & Sections

Summary

A structured summary for this judgment hasn’t been prepared yet. The full text is below.

Precedent status

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

Original judgment text

BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. r. Shubham Gupta, Mr. Shlok Dalal and Kanak, Advocates, Shlok Dalal and Ms. Kanak, Advocates, for the petitioner. for the petitioner. *** *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of setting aside of arbitral award dated the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of arbitral award dated setting aside of arbitral award dated the Constitution of India is seeking passed by Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, 24.04.2025 passed by Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, passed by Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, passed by Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Ludhiana. It is further seeking setting aside of proceedings in execution is further seeking setting aside of proceedings in execution is further seeking setting aside of proceedings in execution petition No.1010 of 2025 pending before learned petition No.1010 of 2025 pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division), learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana.

2. On being asked, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that On being asked, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that On being asked, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that On being asked, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 34 of the Arbitration & remedy to file objection petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & under Section 34 of the Arbitration & remedy to file Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the 1996 Act’) Conciliation Act is not efficacious and Court Act’) is not efficacious and Court may dismiss its petition, thus, the writ petition may be entertained. may dismiss its petition He further petition may be entertained. He further submits that as per Rule 11-A of the Punjab Micro and Sm submits that as per Rule 11 all Enterprises Punjab Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council Rules, 2021 (for short ‘ Facilitation Council Rules, 2021 any decree, (for short ‘the 2021 Rules’), any decree, 2026 CWP-12843-2026 -2- executed by the award or other order made under Chapter V of the Act is executed by the award or other order made under Chapter V of the Act award or other order made under Chapter V of the Act recovered as arrears of land revenue. Collector of the District and the amount is recovered as arrears of land revenue. recovered as arrears of land revenue. Collector of the District and the amount In the present case, respondent has filed execution petition before Civil present case, respondent No.2 has filed execution petition before Civil has filed execution petition before Civil A of the 2021 Rules, execution petition is not Court. In view of Rule 11-A of the 2021 Rules, execution petition is not A of the 2021 Rules, execution petition is not Court. In view of Rule 11 maintainable.

3. The apprehension of the petitioner that Court may not entertain its The apprehension of the petitioner that Court may not entertain its The apprehension of the petitioner that Court may not entertain its The apprehension of the petitioner that Court may not entertain its petition under Section 34 of the 1996 Act is mis petition under Section and premature. The Act is mis-conceived and premature. The remedy to approach Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. In petitioner has remedy to approach Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. In remedy to approach Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. In remedy to approach Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. In view of the availability of effective and efficacious remedy, there is no view of the availability of effective and efficacious remedy, there is no view of the availability of effective and efficacious remedy, there is no view of the availability of effective and efficacious remedy, there is no occasion to entertain the present petition. It is another aspect that occasion to entertain the present petition. Court under is another aspect that Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act may allow or reject petitioner’s petition on merits. Section 34 of the 1996 Act may allow or reject petitioner’s petition on merits. Section 34 of the 1996 Act may allow or reject petitioner’s petition on merits.

4. A of the The petitioner is further claiming that in view of Rule 11-A of the The petitioner is further claiming that in view of Rule 11 The petitioner is further claiming that in view of Rule 11 Court. Civil 2021 Rules, execution petition is not maintainable before the Civil Court. Civil 2021 Rules, execution petition is not maintainable before the Civil 2021 Rules, execution petition is not maintainable before the Civil till date has not passed final order and the petitioner has right to raise Court till date has not passed final order and the petitioner has right to raise till date has not passed final order and the petitioner has right to raise till date has not passed final order and the petitioner has right to raise In the absence of final question of jurisdiction before the said Court. In the absence of final question of jurisdiction before the said Court. question of jurisdiction before the said Court. adjudication, this Court finds no reason to interfere at this stage. adjudication, this Court finds no reason to interfere at this stage. adjudication, this Court finds no reason to interfere at this stage.

5. In the backdrop, the writ petition is d In the backdr isposed of with liberty to the op, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy. petitioner to avail alternative remedy.

28.04.2026 Vimal (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Cwp No. 12843 of 2026). ← Search more judgments