Cars 24 Financial Services Private Limited Vs Narayan Biswas Proprietor of M/S Uttarbango Car Trade & Anr.

This is a petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties.

¶12

The respondent No. 1 is the principal borrower and the respondent No. 2 is the co-borrower.

¶13

The petitioner extended credit facility to the respondent vide Credit Facility Agreement dated 28.01.2021. Under the said Agreement, the respondents had to pay each loan tranche amount within 60 days along with interest charges.

¶14

The said Agreement contains arbitration clause being clause 15.2 which reads as under:-

¶15

“15.1 Governing Laws and Jurisdiction: The Borrower

¶16

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 16/04/2025 at 12:39:12

¶17

shall comply with and fulfil all requirements under ail applicable laws. This Agreement shall be governed and interpreted In accordance with Indian laws and the Parties shall, subject to the requirement to arbitrate any disputes asset out in clause 15.2, be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts at New Delhi.

¶18

15.2 Arbitration: Any dispute under this Agreement shall be settled by binding arbitration conducted in English with the seat of arbitration in new Delhi before a single arbitrator appointed by Lender at its sole discretion, as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.”

¶19

Since there were defaults, the petitioner recalled the credit facility on 14.06.2021 and thereafter invoked arbitration vide legal notice dated 14.08.2024.

¶20

As per the service report, both the respondents are states to be served.

¶21

For the said reasons, I am satisfied that the service has been affected on the respondents. Despite service, there is nobody appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶22

Since there are disputes between the parties, the petition is allowed and the following directions are issued:-

¶23

i) Mr. Anil Sharma, Advocate (Mob. No. 9868070801) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶24

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

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 16/04/2025 at 12:39:12

¶27

‘DIAC’).

¶28

iii) The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of DIAC (Administrative Cost and Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules, 2018.

¶29

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

¶30

v) 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/counterclaims and merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned arbitrator.

¶31

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

¶32

The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶33

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶34

APRIL 4, 2025 / (MS)

¶35

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

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 16/04/2025 at 12:39:12

Cars 24 Financial Services Private Limited v. Narayan Biswas Proprietor of M/S Uttarbango Car Trade & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cars 24 Financial Services Private Limited v. Narayan Biswas Proprietor of M/S Uttarbango Car Trade & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Subir Engineering Works (P) Ltd. Vs Iidl (Ifci Infrastructure Development Ltd)

Bigfoot Retail Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Anka Summor Foods Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Amr-Bbb Consortium Vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.

Mr. Krishnan Ravichandran Sole Proprietor of Mr Consultants and Engineers Vs Indian Potash Limited

Bharati Bhawan Publishers and Distributors Vs Fanish Kumar Proprietor of Clement School Mart Network

M/S Rsbipl-Agc Jv Vs Union of India