Allowed

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited v. Thondamanati Rusheeswar Reddy

Karnataka HC6 Jul 2022CMP/348/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Finding that the petitioner had served notice and necessary conditions were met, the Court appointed a retired District Judge as the sole arbitrator to resolve disputes between a financial services company and its defaulting borrowers.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sri. M. Ramesh Rao, retired District Judge, as the sole arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited Vs… — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF JULY 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.348/2022

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

¶8

A COMPANY INCORPORATED AND REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

¶9

6^TH FLOOR, TOWER 'B', PRESTIGE SHANTINIKETAN THE BUSINESS PRECINCT, WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560 048

¶10

... PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. RAGHUNATH .J, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RISHABHA RAJ THAKUR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND :

¶13

1 . THONDAMANATI RUSHEESWAR REDDY S/O T CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY OOO, GUDI PALLI POLAKALA IRALA MANDAL CHITOOR ANDHARA PRADESH - 517 130

¶14

2 . THIMMAPURAM SANTHA KUMAR S/O LATE T RANGAREDDY 19-26, SAVATAPALLI, POLAKALA IRALAL MANDAL, CHITOOR ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 130

¶15

... RESPONDENTS

¶16

(RESPONDENT NO.1-2 ARE SERVED)

¶17

¶18

THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTES AND DIFFERENCES AMONGST THE PARTIES IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 21 OF THE LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT DATED:02.12.2020 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS AND ETC.

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner, who has extended certain financial assistance to the respondents under the Loan and Security Agreement executed in the month of December 2020, have sought for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator and for conduct of the proceedings at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru. The loan agreement contemplates resolution of the disputes between the parties in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules 2012.

¶22

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the respondents have defaulted in paying the loan and as such, notice for commencement of arbitral proceedings is issued on 30.07.2021. The records also indicate that the respondents, though served with the notice of the present petition, have chosen to remain absent. The necessary conditions for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 are satisfied. As requested by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a retired District Judge must be appointed as the Sole Arbitrator. Hence, the following:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

[a] The petition is allowed;

¶26

[b] Sri. M. Ramesh Rao, retired District Judge, Address: No.1193, Sri Ananda Nilaya, 10^th Cross, Ashokanagar, Bengaluru-560

¶27

¶28

050, is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute between the petitioner and respondents and conduct the proceeding at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru according to the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and

¶29

International), Bengaluru;

¶30

[c] The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru and Sri. M. Ramesh Rao, retired District Judge, Address: No.1193, Sri Ananda Nilaya, 10^th Cross, Ashokanagar, Bengaluru-560 050, as required under the Appointment of

¶31

¶32

Arbitrators by the Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court Scheme, 1996.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited v. Thondamanati Rusheeswar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited v. Thondamanati Rusheeswar Reddy

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

Sri. M.M. Mahadev Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. S. Premalatha Vs the Deputy Registrar of Co. Op Societies

Rajendra Vs the State of Karnataka

Raghuveer M Shenoy Vs the State Co-Operative Election Commission

Shreeji Interiors Vs Provident Housing Limited

Smt Tejaswini S D Vs P Premakumar