In a chamber summons under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court allowed the summon. It noted the petitioner had already disposed of the vehicle but made the order conditional on payment of costs, charges, and receiver expenses.
Chamber summons allowed; costs to be paid by Petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
chs156.11.sxw
1
ssm
ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 944 OF 2009
L & T Finance Limited ....Petitioner.
Vs.
Mr. P. Rajendran S/o. Pachiappa & Anr.
....Respondents.
Ms. Shakuntala Joshi i/by M/s. S.I. Joshi for the Petitioner. None for the Respondents.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.
DATE : 11th FEBRUARY, 2011
P.C.:
Considering the averments made and as per the order passed by
this Court in the Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Petitioner has already disposed of the vehicle, the Chamber summons is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). No costs.
2 However, it is subject to payment of necessary costs, charges and
expenses of the Receiver, if any, to be paid by the Petitioner.
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
L & T Finance Limited
Mr. P. Rajendran S/o. Pachiappa & Anr.
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
