Disposed

Sajana P M K. v. Daimler Financier Services India Private Limited

Kerala HC5 Sept 2023AR/110/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of arbitration requests related to loan accounts by permitting the petitioner to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.50,50,000 via 10 equal monthly installments, terminating the appointed Arbitrator's mandate. Default would void the arrangement.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to pay Rs.50,50,000 in 10 equal monthly installments commencing 15.09.2023; Arbitrator's mandate terminated.

Sajana P M K. Vs Daimler Financier Services India Private Limited — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 14TH BHADRA, 1945

¶5

AR NO. 108 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SAJANA P M K., W/O NOUSHAD K.E.,
AROMA, GOPALAPEETT, TEMPLE GATE P.O.,
THALASSERY, KANNUR – 670102.

¶8

BY ADVS.I.DINESH MENON
L.RAJESH NARAYAN

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

M/S DAIMLER FINANCIER SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,
1ST FLOOR, TOWER B- TEK MEADOWS, NO.51,
RAJIV GANDHI SALAI, SHIOLINGANALLUR, CHENNAI,
TAMIL NADU -600119,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.

¶11

BY ADVS.NIRMAL V NAIR
ARATHI PRABHAKARAN(K/001158/2022)
ENCIL K. SABU(K/771/2023)

¶12

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.09.2023, ALONG WITH AR.110/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

AR Nos. 108 & 110/2022

¶14

-2-

¶15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶16

PRESENT

¶17

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶18

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 14TH BHADRA,

¶19

¶20

AR NO. 110 OF 2022

¶21

PETITIONER:

¶22

SAJANA P M K., W/O NOUSHAD K.E.,
AROMA, GOPALAPEETT, TEMPLE GATE P.O.,
THALASSERY, KANNUR – 670102.

¶23

BY ADV I.DINESH MENON

¶24

RESPONDENT:

¶25

M/S DAIMLER FINANCIER SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE
LIMITED, 1ST FLOOR, TOWER B- TEK MEADOWS,
NO.51, RAJIV GANDHI SALAI, SHIOLINGANALLUR,
CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU - 600119,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.

¶26

BY ADV.SRI.NIRMAL V.NAIR
ARATHI PRABHAKARAN(K/001158/2022)
ENCIL K. SABU(K/771/2023)

¶27

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.09.2023, ALONG WITH AR.108/2022, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

AR Nos. 108 & 110/2022

¶29

-3-

¶30

ORDER

¶31

[AR Nos.108/2022, 110/2022]

¶32

Even though these Arbitration Requests have

¶33

been impelled with several allegations and
averments, when they matters were called today,

¶34

the learned counsel for the respondent submitted

¶35

that if the petitioner is interested in a
settlement, his client is willing to offer her

¶36

an opportunity to pay off the total outstanding

¶37

amount of Rs.50,50,000/- in all the loan

¶38

accounts, as on 23.08.2023, in installments. He
then left it to this Court to fix the apposite

¶39

number of installments that can be offered to

¶40

the petitioner for making such payment.

¶41

2.The learned counsel appearing for the

¶42

petitioner submitted that his client is willing
to accept the afore suggestion and prayed that
at least 10 monthly installments be afforded to

¶43

AR Nos. 108 & 110/2022

¶44

-4-

¶45

her to pay off the afore mentioned overdue

¶46

amount of Rs.50,50,000/-.

¶47

In the afore circumstances and recording the

¶48

appreciation of this Court for the stand taken

¶49

by the respondent, I dispose of these

¶50

Arbitration Requests on the basis of the consent
between the parties; thus permitting the

¶51

petitioner to pay off the aforementioned overdue
amount of Rs.50,50,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs
fifty thousand only), as on 23.08.2023, along

¶52

with applicable charges and interest, in 10
equal monthly installments commencing from
15.09.2023. She shall also, in addition to this,
pay the regular EMIs without fail.

¶53

It goes without saying that if the

¶54

petitioner commits default in payment of two or
more installments, the benefit granted under

¶55

this order would stand vacated and the

¶56

respondent will be at liberty to recover the

¶57

AR Nos. 108 & 110/2022

¶58

entire liability from her, by continuing with

¶59

further action as per the loan agreement.

¶60

Axiomatically, the mandate of the Arbitrator

¶61

appointed by the respondent shall stand
terminated under the ambit of Section 14 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶64

JUDGE

¶65

akv

¶66

AR Nos. 108 & 110/2022

¶67

-6-

¶68

APPENDIX OF AR 110/2022

¶69

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶70

ANNEXURE1TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF THE
VEHICLE KL-58 X 9439
ANNEXURE2TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION AWARD
DATED 9.6.2020
ANNEXURE3TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED
01.4.2022
ANNEXURE4TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN AR
NO,42/2022 DATED 18.2.2022

¶71

AR Nos. 108 & 110/2022

¶72

-7-

¶73

APPENDIX OF AR 108/2022

¶74

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶75

ANNEXURE1TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF THE
VEHICLE KL-58 X 9460
ANNEXURE2TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S
OBJECTION DATED 01.4.2022
ANNEXURE3TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN AR
NO.42/2022 DATED 18.2.2022

Sajana P M K. v. Daimler Financier Services India Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajana P M K. v. Daimler Financier Services India Private Limited

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

Sreekumaran @ Sreekumaran.B. Vs Sudevan

Ananda Babu M.J Vs Shri. Biju Prabhakar

The Kottappady Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. E155, Vs Sarasu N.P

Dr.Meera, W/o.Harimohan Vs Dr.Harimohan K.G. S/O.K.P.Gopinathan

Rincy Ann Lalu Vs Benoy Kuruvilla

Sathyabhama Vs Advocate Madhusoodanan Nair