The right of a Sub-Contractor under the MSMED Act, 2006 to recover payments for the goods and services rendered by it would be independent of the terms and conditions contained in any contract agreement to the contrary – The National Highways and Infrastructure Develoment Corporation Ltd. (NHIDCL) and 2 Ors. Vs. Girin Deka and 2 Ors. – Gauhati High Court
Hon’ble Gauhati High Court held that the sub-contractor comes within the definition of “supplier” as provided in section 2(n) of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. A careful analysis of the admitted facts of this case, in our opinion, prima facie establishes a “Buyer-Supplier” relationship between the appellant no. 1 (NHIDCL) and the sub-contractor falling within the scope and ambit of the Act of 2006. In the event, any MSM Enterprise, coming within the ambit of the Act of 2006, is wrongfully denied payment for the goods delivered or services rendered by it, than in that event, regardless of any other law for the time being in force to the contrary, the enterprise will be entitled to recover its dues by taking recourse to section 18. Section 18 of the Act of 2006 , in our view, not only provides an adequate and efficacious remedy to the MSM Enterprise to recover its legitimates dues but the same also provides an opportunity to fast –track the resolution of all such disputes.
