karnataka engineering company limited case study

• Most Popular
• Explore all categories

karnataka engineering case analysis

• Karnataka Engineering Case Analysis

Upload: sanjay-sharma

Post on 12-Jul-2015

2.051 views

36 download

Embed Size (px): 344 x 292 429 x 357 514 x 422 599 x 487

Karnataka Engineering Company A case study: Logistics & Supply Chain Management

Course: Logistics & Supply Chain Management

Professor: TAS Vijayaraghavan

-:Submitted By:- PGCBM-19

Rana Sarkar (RB11018/108138) Vikrant Singh (RB11014/108825)

Sangita Sharma (RB11077/108553)

Company Background

Based in Raichur Entered in to two wheeler industry in 1981 with Mopeds Started scooter production in 1983 19 branches all over India managed by Branch Manager The minimum throughput that would justify setting up of a branch in any state would be 4.25 lakh per month (78 Mopeds or 33 Scooters per month or any other combination)

Marketing offices are located in most of the states Mopeds and Scooter are transported by a specially adapted trucks with a capacity of either 80 Mopeds or 50 Scooters or combination of both

Secondary transportation is arranged by marketing offices by LCVs or trucks

Marketing Offices of KEC Ltd

Business in Andhra Pradesh Marketing office is situated in Hyderabad Operating with two branch ware houses one at Adoni and other at Mahbubnagar

Selection criteria: first major town close to production facility

Hyderabad collects orders, communicate to both warehouses Secondary transportation responsibility with ware house manager Difficulty in arranging secondary transportation

Some Factual data Sales in Jan-Jul 1998 are 465 Mopeds and 78 Scooters

In Jan-Jul 1998 AP contributed around 5.3 % of KEC’s total moped sales and 3.6% total scooter sales

Average monthly off take in AP during Jan-Jul 1998 are 1925 Mopeds and 288 Scooters

The current rate of tax : 4 % CST Current sales in AP Rs.14.33/- million PA At this rate the money out flow to exchequer Rs.573260/- Cost for setting up of one branch Rs.17000/- to Rs.21000/- pm ie Rs.204000/- to Rs.252000/- PA

So up to two branches could be set up in the state at the current rate of tax and sales

At what volumes is the opening of a warehouse in a state justified primarily on the grounds of the 4% CST for transaction across states ?

How many warehouses do you think are required of KEC’s products in Andhra Pradesh? What could the candidate locations of the warehouse be? What would be the criteria on which to select the candidates?

Determine the optimal selection of warehouse and the best allocation of the demand points to the selected warehouses.

What are the best choices for the shipment (truck) size from the warehouses to the demand points? Given the size, what routing would you recommend for a typical despatch run.

Analysis The following table shows the coordinates of the Branch office locations

X-Coordinate

Y Coordinate

Moped Offtake Rate

1 Adoni 2.2 10 41 4.8 2 Chittore 5 4 106 4.8

3 Nellore 6.5 7 44 4.8 4 Ongle 6.5 9.5 20 4.8

5 Chirala 7 10.5 54.8 4.8

6 Cuddappah 4.5 7.1 61.4 4.8 7 Hindupur 2.4 5.8 71.2 4.8

8 Anantpur 2.8 7.8 76 4.8 9 Kurnool 3.4 10.2 24.8 4.8

10 Tiupati 5.5 5 90.6 4.8

11 Guntur 7 11.8 119 4.8 12 Vijaywada 7.5 12.1 253 4.8

13 Kammam 6.9 14.1 104 4.8 14 Warangal 6.5 15.8 89 4.8

15 Rajanundry 9.1 13.3 80 4.8 16 Kakinada 9.9 13 76.4 4.8

17 Vizag 11.2 15.2 124.6 4.8

18 Vijayanagarm 11.5 16 38 4.8 19 Mehboobnagar 3.2 13.2 36 4.8

20 Hyderabad 4.2 14.5 728 4.8 21 Nizamabad 3.5 18 69 4.8

22 Karim Nagar 5.1 17.8 79 4.8

Using Logware

Selecting 1 location for warehouse

Selecting 2 location for warehouse

Selecting 3 location for warehouses

Selecting 4 location for warehouses

It is evident from the Screenshots of Logware ……

3 Ware Houses are required as per Multiple center – of – Gravity Location Method , If you increase more than 3 ware houses cost getting increase as shown in above MultiCOG Method.

Best Locations also identified to supply various Demand points mentioned in Map of Andhra Pradesh from ware houses and X & Y Coordinates for ware houses are also shown in figures (Near to Hyderabad, Vijaywada and Cuddappah) .

Based on our analysis on demand and rate per km, we have identified the old and new distribution method as shown in given below table.

Place BIG MED SMALL BIG MED SMALL

Adoni 0 0 0 0 0 0

Anantpur 1 0 0 1 0 0

Chirala 0 1 0 0 1 0

Chittore 1 1 0 1 1 0

Cuddapah 1 0 0 1 0 0

Guntur 1 1 0 1 1 0

Hindupur 1 0 0 1 0 0

Hyderabad 9 0 0 9 0 0

Kakinada 1 0 0 1 0 0

Karimnagar 1 0 0 1 0 0

Khammam 1 1 0 1 1 0

Kurnool 0 1 0 0 1 0

Mehbubnagar 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nellore 0 1 0 0 1 0

Nizamabad 1 0 0 1 0 0

Ongole 0 0 1 0 0 1

Rajamundry 1 0 0 1 0 0

Tirupati 0 2 0 0 2 0

Vijayawada 3 0 1 0 0 0

Vizag 1 1 0 1 1 0

Vijayanagaram 0 1 0 0 1 0

Warangal 1 0 1 1 0 1

Total Trucks 24 10 3 21 10 2

Conclusion The company should have 3 ware houses and the points to where it has to supply is shown in the screenshot below.

The no of truck required will be reduced by 3 big truck and 1 small truck. The warehousing decisions will ensure better response times to satisfy customers requirement and lower the total cost by optimized cost related to distribution.

Kateel Engineering Industry Private Limited, Karnataka, India

Karnataka Diploma CET 2013 Solved Question Paper - Electrical and Electronics Engineering

Case Study: Automation of Treasury Department In Karnataka Government

RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, KARNATAKA. WELCOME TO ENGINEERING SECTION OF R G U H S, KARNATAKA

Karnataka Diploma CET 2013 Solved Question Paper - Mechanical Engineering

Karnataka Diploma CET 2013 Solved Question Paper - Electronics and Communication Engineering

Karnataka Mechanical Engineering - Jiva - Jiva - Homejivacareer.org/.../docs/Karnataka/Mechanical-Engineering.pdfEyeHospital Manjunathanagar Rajajinagar, Bangalore 560 010 080-23387333,

Best Private Engineering College in Bangalore karnataka

Karnataka Diploma CET 2013 Solved Question Paper - Chemical Engineering

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporationmybmtc.com/sites/default/files/KSRTC (Cadre & Recruitment...Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation ... MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

J S Engineering Exports Karnataka INDIA

Karnataka Diploma CET 2013 Solved Question Paper - Aeronautical Engineering

COMMUNITY OWNED PRESCHOOLS (Case S tudy in karnataka )

Karnataka CET 2011 - Entrance Examination for Engineering and Medical Colleges

Name of University & Colleges · Regional Engineering College, Srinagar, Jammu & Kashmir Regional Engineering College, Surat, Gujarat Regional Engineering College, Suratkal, Karnataka

Government of Karnataka Water Resources …waterresources.kar.nic.in/tender volume-11 dated 30 May 2011.pdfGovernment of Karnataka Water Resources Department ... Karnataka Engineering

r i a l S cie c Journal of Material Sciences & Engineering · PDF fileUVCE, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bangalore University, Bangalore, Karnataka, India ... In case of 1.5

Karnataka PGCET 2013 Previous Year Civil Engineering Paper & Answer Key

Engineering Industry - Karnataka 2019-20 Wages Engineering Industry...C:\Users\User\Desktop\Engineering Industry - Karnataka 2019-20.xps Author User Created Date 3/13/2019 11:22:09

Precise Engineering Models Karnataka India

Engineering Colleges in Karnataka

Power Company of Karnataka Limited Standard Bid …218.248.45.137/CASE-2 RFQ GAS Davanagere.pdfPower Company of Karnataka Limited 1 Power Company of Karnataka Limited (A Government

Karnataka Engineering 2008-09

INDIA,KARNATAKA STATE CASE STUDY

Judgment of Shankar Bidari Case Before Karnataka High Court Wp8788-12

Why have ro plants failed in karnataka raichur case study

Karnataka Case Study

A case study of Karnataka - Karnataka Guarantee Of ...kgsc.kar.nic.in/panels/Case Study_V3.pdf · Guarantee of Services to Citizens: A case study of Karnataka This case study documents

V. S. Engineering, Karnataka, india

218962689 Karnataka Diploma CET 2013 Solved Question Paper Mechanical Engineering

GST-Karnataka | CTD-Karnataka | Commercial Taxes ... · Transformers, Electrical wiring and fixture, Public Health Engineering ... Sewage treatment plant (STP) — STP is a plant

Karnataka Diploma CET 2013 Solved Question Paper - Civil Engineering

S. No. INSTITUTE NAME STATE LAST NAME FIRST NAME · PDF file17 jain college of engineering karnataka patil balu ... 113 bnm institute of technology karnataka kc narendra engineering

KUSO’S NEW CONTACT ADDRESS KARNATAKA … · karnataka united sourashtra organisation c/o. pharma associates, ... authorised dealers for kirloskar & ... computer science and engineering

Karnataka Coast: A Case for Better Protection

Provide details on what you need help with along with a budget and time limit. Questions are posted anonymously and can be made 100% private.

Studypool matches you to the best tutor to help you with your question. Our tutors are highly qualified and vetted.

Your matched tutor provides personalized help according to your question details. Payment is made only after you have completed your 1-on-1 session and are satisfied with your session.

• Homework Q&A
• Become a Tutor

All Subjects

Mathematics

Programming

Health & Medical

Engineering

Computer Science

Foreign Languages

Access over 35 million academic & study documents

Karnataka engineering company case study essay sample.

Sign up to view the full document!

24/7 Study Help

Stuck on a study question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic  math  to advanced rocket science !

Similar Documents

working on a study question?

Studypool is powered by Microtutoring TM

Copyright © 2024. Studypool Inc.

Studypool is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university.

Ongoing Conversations

Access over 35 million study documents through the notebank

Get on-demand Q&A study help from verified tutors

Read 1000s of rich book guides covering popular titles

Sign up with Google

Sign up with Facebook

Already have an account? Login

Login with Google

Login with Facebook

Don't have an account? Sign Up

• UK & Ireland

How is this helpful for me?

• Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
• Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
• Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
• The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

• ON OFF Text Highlighter

Report a problem

WP 17266 of 2022

SANDEEP LAHIRI

SUMANA NAGANAND

M.NAGAPRASANNA

• MAHALAKSHMI ENGINEERING WORKS v. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED Karnataka High Court Nov 9, 2022
• Subsequent References
• CaseIQ (AI Recommendations)
• ORIGINAL PDF

MAHALAKSHMI ENGINEERING WORKS v. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 09 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.17266 of 2022 (GM - TEN)

1. MAHALAKSHMI ENGINEERING WORKS

A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN

REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR

SRI NAGARAJU

S/O SANNASWAMY

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS

HAVING OFFICE AT BHERYA

HASSAN MYSORE ROAD

K.R.NAGAR TALUK

MYSURU - 571 602.

2. SURESH KUMAR

S/O HANUMATHRAYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

HAVING OFFICE AT

KORATEGER TALUK

KOLALA HOBLI

D.NAGENAHALLI, TUMAKURU

KARNATAKA - 572 129.

... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI NANDAKUMAR C.K., SR.ADVOCATE FOR

SRI SANDEEP LAHIRI, ADVOCATE)

BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED

A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER

THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956

HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT KAVERI BHAVAN

K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009

REPRESENTED BY ITS

DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER(ELE)

OPERATIONS-1.

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI S.SRIRANGA, SR.ADVOCATE FOR

SMT.SUMANA NAGANAND, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR

ENTIRE RECORDS LEADING TO THE TENDER NOTIFICATIONS DTD

28.03.2022; QUASH THE TENDER NOTIFICATIONS BEARING 1.ENQUIRY BESCOM/CGM(OP)/DGM(OP-1/AGM(OP-3)/M-4/2021- 22/46 DTD 28.03.2022 AT TRANSFORMER REPAIR CENTER IN RAJAJINAGAR ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.,

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED

FOR ORDERS ON 07.11.2022, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

The petitioners are before this Court calling in question 40 tenders floated by the respondent/Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited ('BESCOM' for short).

2. Heard Sri Nandakumar.C.K., learned senior counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri.S.Sriranga, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent.

3. Brief facts that lead the petitioners to this Court in the subject petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:-

The 1 st petitioner claims to be a proprietorship concern engaged in electrical contract works which would include repair and servicing of electrical transformers and claims to have a valid licence issued by the competent authority to undertake such works. The 2 nd petitioner is an independent rate contractor engaged in the same kind of electrical works. The proprietor of the 1 st petitioner/Company and the 2 nd petitioner claim to belong to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe. The respondent/BESCOM issued a notice inviting tenders ('NIT' for short) for repair, reconditioning and distribution of transformers of various capacity, at Transformers Repair Centers at different Taluka Divisions coming within the jurisdiction of BESCOM. The notification was issued on 28-03-2022 notifying 54 Transformer Repair Centers. A

corrigendum to the said notification comes to be issued on 13-04-2022 cancelling four tenders out of 54 tenders shown as Transformer Repair Centers. Therefore, tenders came to be restricted to 50.

4. Out of 50 tenders, ten tenders were reserved for persons belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes category claiming them to be reserved in terms of Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Rules, 2000. The said tenders became a subject matter of Writ Petition No.8492 of 2022. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court in terms of its order dated 20-06-2022 quashed the tender notification insofar as it pertained to reservation of 10 tenders, for tenderers belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, as those were the only tenders that were challenged. The BESCOM tossed the said judgment before the Division Bench. The Division Bench by its order dated 02-09-2022 dismissed the appeal in Writ Appeal No.667 of 2022 affirming the order passed by the co- ordinate Bench.

5. After dismissal of the writ appeal and confirmation of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench, those 10 tenders which were quashed by the co-ordinate Bench were re-tendered. The re- tender was restricted to those tenders as it was those tenders which had been the subject matter of reservation in favour of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in the tender process.

6. The subject petition comes to be filed on 26-08-2022 calling in question all the 50 tenders that are notified by BESCOM.

7. The learned senior counsel Sri.C.K.Nandakumar representing the petitioners would vehemently contend that the petitioners were precluded from participating in the tender earlier, as they come within 10 tenders only which were reserved tenders and that having been quashed all the 50 tenders had to be re- tendered or the petitioners should be permitted to participate in all the 50 tenders. He would contend that the finding of the co- ordinate Bench would enure to the benefit of the petitioners and they be permitted to participate. He would but, admit that the

petitioners never participated in the tender notification issued on 28-03-2022.

8. On the other hand, the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent/BESCOM would refute the submissions to contend that the petitioners who have never participated in the tender cannot point out any lacunae in the tender. A tenderer who does not participate would not get locus to even question any part of the tender. He would submit that the issue whether the petitioners and the like, have locus, is no longer res integra as the Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA v. GWALIOR JHANSI EXPRESSWAY LIMITED 1 has considered the said issue, which is subsequently followed by a co- ordinate Bench in Writ Petition No.4041 of 2022 and connected cases decided on 07-03-2022. He submits that the issue stands covered and the petitioners cannot be heard on any other point. He seeks dismissal of the petition.

( 2018) 8 SCC 243

9. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned senior counsel and have perused the material on record. In furtherance whereof the issues that would fall for my consideration are -

(i) Whether BESCOM was right in seeking to re- tender only those 10 tenders that were quashed by this Court? and

(ii) Whether petitioners have any locus to question any act of BESCOM qua the tender notified, notwithstanding their non-participation in the tender process?

In the light of the second issue cutting at the root of the matter, I deem it appropriate to consider the same at the outset.

Issue No.2:

10. The afore-narrated facts with regard to issuance of notice inviting tender for the works notified therein are not in dispute. The petitioners though belong to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes

and reservation of 10 tenders being accorded thereto out of 50 tenders, did not participate in the tender process, are all a matter of record. The notice inviting tender did no where restrict any tenderer to participate in any tender on the NIT dated 28.03.2022. Though reservation was stipulated qua 10 tenders, the tenderers belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes were not precluded from participating in the tenders of general category. As a matter of fact, there were several tenderers who did participate in both the tenders reserved for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and in the general category. The petitioners chose to sit on the fence, did not participate in the tender process at all, neither in the 10 reserved tenders nor in the 40 unreserved tenders. Therefore, the petitioners now seek to point out lacunae in the tenders, sitting outside throughout. Whether that would be permissible is the question?

11. A tenderer who remains outside and then seeks to question the tender process or conditions stipulated in the tender notification would not get locus to challenge and condition of tender. This issue need not detain this Court for long or delve deep

into the matter. The Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (supra) considering this issue, has held as follows:

"20. While considering the relief claimed by the respondent (claimant), the same should have been tested on the touchstone of the principle governing the tender process, especially when the validity of the tender document has not been put in issue or challenged before any competent forum. Going by the terms and conditions in the tender documents, as already alluded to in para 10 above, there is no title of doubt that the right of the claimant (respondent) to match the bid of L-1 or to exercise ROFR would come into play only if the respondent was to participate in the tender process pursuant to the notice inviting tenders from the interested parties. The objective of tender process is not only to adhere to a transparent mechanism but to encourage competition and give equal opportunity to all tenderers with the end result of getting a fair offer or value for money. The plain wording of the eligibility clause in the tender documents and the incidental stipulations make it explicit that the respondent was required to participate in the tender process by submitting its sealed bid (technical and financial). The fact that a deeming clause has been provided in the tender document that if the respondent was to participate in the bidding process, it shall be deemed to fulfill all the requirements of the tender Clauses 3 to 6 of RFP, being the existing concessionaire of the project, does not exempt the respondent from participating in the tender process; rather the tenor of the terms of the documents made it obligatory for the respondent to participate in the tender process to be considered as a responsive bidder, along with others. Having failed to participate in the tender process and, more so, despite the express terms in the tender documents, validity whereof has not been challenged, the respondent cannot be heard to contend that it had acquired any right whatsoever. Only the entities who participate in the tender process pursuant to a tender notice can be allowed to make grievances about the non-fulfillment or breach of any of the terms and conditions of the tender documents concerned. The respondent who chose to stay away from the tender process, cannot be heard to whittle down, in any manner, the rights of the eligible bidders who

had participated in the tender process on the basis of the written and express terms and conditions. At the culmination of the tender process, if the respondent had not participated, in law, the offer submitted by the eligible bidders is required to be considered on the basis of the stated terms and conditions. Thus, if the claim of the respondent was to be strictly adjudged on the basis of the terms and conditions specified in the subject tender document, the respondent has no case whatsoever." (Emphasis supplied)

The Apex Court clearly holds that the tenderer who would chose to stay away from the tender process cannot be heard to whittle down the rights of eligible bidders who had participated in the tender process on the basis of written and express terms and conditions. At the culmination of the tender process, if the tenderer had not participated in law, he cannot be seen to question the terms and conditions. The petitioners, in the case at hand, have admitted their non participation in the tender. Staying away from the tender, they cannot now seek to challenge the tender. It is further germane to notice a similar view taken by the Calcutta High Court. A Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in the case of SUBIR GHOSH

v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS 2 has held as follows:

"4. The more important factor is that the tender process in this case opened sometime in March, 2019 and the closing date for submitting online bids was April 1, 2019. The writ petition was filed in January, 2020. Though it is submitted on behalf of the writ

2020 SCC OnLine Cal 2213

petitioner that the time to submit the bids was extended, no specific date in such regard is indicated. What is apparent is that the writ petitioner did not participate in the bidding process and yet chose to challenge the same.

5. It is possible that a prospective bidder finds the terms of the tender documents to be unfair or illegal and challenges the same; but such challenge has to be before the time to put in the bids is closed. At any rate, if a bid is made and the bid is thrown out on an illegal or unfair ground contained in the tender documents, even then, a challenge can be fashioned. But a person who has not participated in the bidding process at all cannot challenge the tender conditions on any ground whatsoever. This admitted aspect of the matter escaped the attention of the Single Bench while passing the impugned order of January 15, 2020.

6. For the reasons aforesaid, the order dated January 15, 2020 cannot be sustained and the same is set aside. Since the best arguable case of the writ petitioner will not result in any of the tender terms being altered as the writ petitioner did not participate in the process at all, the writ petition itself is dismissed. Nothing in this order will be construed to be an approval of the terms and conditions of the tender document and in an appropriate challenge, the same may be considered in accordance with law." In the light of the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA and the Division

petitioners to challenge the tender process being held against the petitioners, the first issue with regard to tender process would not arise for consideration, as it is trite law, that if a writ petitioner has no locus to raise a challenge to the subject matter, no other ground on merit of the challenge need be considered.

12. For the aforesaid reasons, finding that the petitioners have no locus to maintain the petition, the petition is dismissed as unentertainable.

Consequently, I.A.No.1/2022 also stands disposed.

Edit Citation

• Distinguished
• Referencing
• Uncategorized

Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this Citation.

Get 2 points on providing a valid reason for the above change.

Add Equivalent Citation

Get 1 point on adding a valid citation to this judgment.

Select Preference

Share the Judgment

Are you sure?

By clicking on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the attorneys appearing in this matter. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us. Leave your message here.

Click here to remove this judgment from your profile.

(+91) 80 68476500

• [email protected]
• News & Events
• Case Studies
• Request a quote

Company Fact Sheet

• Established in 2006 with its corporate Headquarters and manufacturing facilities located in India’s high-tech capital Bangalore.
• More than 200 employees
• Over 100,000 sq. ft. of manufacturing space – new facility spread across 85,000 Sq. Ft near Bengaluru International Airport
• Specialize in Precision progressive press tools, precision stamping parts, EDM, Plastic Injection Molds and components, Insert and Over Molding Electroplating (Barrel), Assembly & Sub-Assembly and Value Added Services.
• We are IATF 16949, ISO AS 9100 D and ISO 9001:2015 QMS certified organization.
• International sales and support
• Market focus: , Electrical & Electronics , Aerospace , Automotive & Ancillary and Consumer/Industrial
• In-house technology group develops creative manufacturing solutions to provide customers with a competitive advantage
• Stamping presses with capacities from 15 to 200 tons
• Focus on integrating new technology to enhance design-for-manufacturing (DFM)
• Custom automation and work cell experts
• Continual investments in new equipment and technology

For More Information Click Here

More Company Information

* All fields are marked as mandatory

Get a Quote

Eigen Engineering specializes in complete turnkey packages. Please fill out the fields below to receive a quote.

© Eigen. 2024