Allowed

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited v. Marshall Machines Limited & Ors.

Delhi HC29 Jan 2024ARB.P./1107/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought appointment of a sole arbitrator under Clause 12 of the Term Loan Agreement dated 28.12.2017 after respondents defaulted on a Rs. 2.10 crore term loan and a loan recall notice. Respondents did not appear despite service. Court allowed the petition, appointed Ms. Kritika Mehra as sole arbitrator, with proceedings to be held under DIAC's aegis.

What did the court decide?

Sole Arbitrator (Ms. Kritika Mehra) appointed to adjudicate disputes; proceedings under DIAC; parties to approach within two weeks.

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Vs Marshall Machines… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~7

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 1107/2023

¶4

TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED

¶5

..... Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Savyasachi Sahai, Mr. Vishwajeet Singh Shekhawat, Advs.

¶7

versus

¶8

MARSHALL MACHINES LIMITED & ORS.

¶9

..... Respondent

¶10

Through:

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

¶12

¶13

O R D E R 29.01.2024

¶14

This is a petition seeking appointment of the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising from Term Loan Agreement dated 28.12.2017.

¶15

At the outset, Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the Scheme of Amalgamation, the petitioner has amalgamated into TATA Capital Limited.

¶16

On his oral request, the same is allowed and the name of the petitioner is changed from TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED to TATA CAPITAL LIMITED. All the assets and liability of TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED now vest with TATA CAPITAL LIMITED.

¶17

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/08/2024 at 12:42:37

¶18

In the present case, the petitioner had advanced a term loan facility for Rs. 2.10 crores to the respondents. As the respondents defaulted in making the repayment, the petitioner issued Loan Recall Notice dated 31.08.2023 for an amount of Rs. 51,64,752. Since the same was defaulted, the petitioner invokes the arbitration clause. Clause 12 of the Term Loan Agreement reads as under:-

¶19

“Clause 12 of the Term Loan Agreement:

¶20

"If any dispute, difference or claim arises between any of the Obligors and the Lender in connection with the Facility or as to the interpretation, validity, implementation or effect of the Facility Documents or as to the rights and liabilities of the parties under the Facility Documents or alleged breach of the Facility Documents or anything done or omitted to be done pursuant to the Facility Documents, the same shall be settled by arbitration to be held in the place as mentioned at Serial No. 18 of Annexure 1 hereto, in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliations Act, 1996, or any statutory amendments thereto and shall be referred to a sole arbitrator to be appointed by the Lender. The award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on all parties concerned. The arbitration proceedings shall be in English language. Cost of arbitration shall be borne by the Obligors. "

¶21

Notice was issued on 19.10.2023. As per the service report, the notice has been served and despite service there is nobody appearing for the respondent in first call and even in the second call, there is no appearance on behalf of the respondent.

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/08/2024 at 12:42:37

¶24

For the said reasons, the petition is allowed with the following directions are issued:-

¶25

i) Ms. Kritika Mehra (Mob. No.9873734270) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶26

ii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi hereinafter, referred to as the ‘DIAC’). The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶27

iii) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act prior to entering into the reference.

¶28

iv) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including as to the arbitrability of any of the claim, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims on merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned arbitrator.

¶29

v) The parties shall approach the learned Arbitrator within two weeks from today.

¶30

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶31

The amended memo handed over in Court today is taken on record.

¶32

JANUARY 29, 2024/NG

¶33

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶34

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited v. Marshall Machines Limited & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Capital Financial Services Limited v. Marshall Machines Limited & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Pratap Singh Vs Gnctd and Anr. & Anr.

Inland Waterways Authority of India Vs M/S Haldia Nirman Projects Pvt. Ltd.

Inland Waterways Authority of India Vs M/S Haldia Nirman Projects Pvt. Ltd.

Vir Bhan Mittal Vs the Secretary Central Board of Irrigation and Power.

Satya Prakash Gupta & Anr. Vs Czar Buildwell Private Limited & Ors.

Prayag Polytech Private Limited Vs Iworid Digital Solutions Private Limited & Ors.