Allowed

M/S. Shriram Finance Limited v. Junaid.v.K

Kerala HC6 Jun 2024AR/63/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Financier sought appointment of a sole arbitrator under the arbitration clause in a vehicle loan agreement after borrowers and guarantors defaulted and failed to respond to the pre-arbitral notice. The court allowed the request and nominated a sole arbitrator, fixing Thalassery as seat.

What did the court decide?

Adv. Baby Lathika. K nominated as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes under Annexure-A agreement, with seat at Thalassery.

M/S. Shriram Finance Limited Vs Junaid.v.K — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946

¶5

AR NO. 63 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S. SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED
(FORMERLY KNOWN AS SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY
LTD), 2ND FLOOR, T.K. COMPLEX, OPPOSITE CANARA BANK,
PANOOR, REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
SHYJU.K., PIN - 670692

¶8

BY ADVS.
P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
SABU GEORGE
MANU VYASAN PETER
MEERA P.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1JUNAID.V.K
AGED 34 YEARS

¶11

S/O. ISMAIL, VILAKKODANTAVIDA, P.O.CHENDAYAD, VIA
PANOOR, KANNUR., PIN - 670692

¶12

2 KUNJALIUMMA.V.K. @ KUNHALEEMA AGED 57 YEARS

¶13

D/O. PAREED, VILAKKODANTAVIDA, P.O.CHENDAYAD, PUTHOOR,
VIA PANOR, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670692

¶14

3ABDUL LATHEEF.V.K.
AGED 45 YEARS

¶15

S/O. KUNJABDULLA, VILAKKODANTAVIDA, P.O.CHENDAYAD,
PUTHOOR, VIA PANOR, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670692

¶16

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

A.R.No.63/2024

G.GIRISH, J.

---------------

A.R.No.63 of 2024

¶22

-----------------------------Dated this the 6^th day of June, 2024

¶23

--------------------------------------------

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

This Arbitration Request is filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) for the appointment of sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes arisen between the petitioner and the respondents in connection with a loan availed by the 1^st respondent for the purchase of a motor car, with the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents as guarantors.

¶26

The hypothecation cum loan agreement executed in between the petitioner and the respondents provided for the reference of the disputes arising out of, or in connection with the said agreement to an Arbitrator appointed under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The aforesaid agreement is produced by the petitioner as Annexure-A. Clause 22(a) of Annexure-A agreement contains the relevant arbitration clause, as per which the arbitration proceedings are to be held at Thalassery, and the language of arbitration shall be English. Alleging that the respondents committed default in the repayment

¶27

¶28

A.R.No.63/2024

¶29

of the loan, and thus violated the terms of Annexure-A agreement, the petitioner issued Annexure-C notice conveying the intention to have the dispute referred to an Arbitrator if the respondents are not making payment within 30 days from the date of receipt of that notice. Since the respondents did not co-operate with the petitioner for the appointment of an Arbitrator as requested in Annexure-C notice, the present petition is filed before this Court.

¶30

Though the respondents were duly served with notice of institution of this Arbitration Request, they did not choose to appear before this Court or to file any counter affidavit.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶32

Clause 22(a) of Annexure-A agreement would reveal

¶33

that the petitioner and the respondents had agreed to have the disputes arising in between them in connection with the said agreement resolved by a reference to the arbitrator appointed under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Annexure-C notice would reveal that the petitioner had conveyed to the respondents, the intention to have the dispute regarding the outstanding dues in the loan transaction resolved through the appointment of an Arbitrator. Obviously, the respondents have not co-operated to adopt the above course as requested in Annexure-

¶34

¶35

A.R.No.63/2024

¶36

C notice issued to them. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get an order from this Court for the appointment of a sole arbitrator for the resolution of the dispute relating to the default committed by the respondents in the payment of the loan amount covered by Annexure-A agreement.

¶37

In the result, the application stands allowed and an order is passed as follows:

¶38

i) Adv. Baby Lathika. K, Karipparath (H), Pinarayi.P.O., Thalassery, Kannur is nominated as the sole Arbitrator to arbitrate upon the disputes that have arisen between the petitioner and the respondent within the purview of Annexure-A agreement.

¶39

ii) The learned Arbitrator is at liberty to rule on all issues between the parties in connection with the said agreement, including his own jurisdiction if the parties raise such a dispute.

¶40

iii) The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator within a period of ten days from today and to obtain a Statement of Disclosure from the learned Arbitrator as provided under Section 11(8) read with Section12(1) of the Act.

¶41

iv) Once the Disclosure Statement is obtained from the learned Arbitrator, the Registry shall issue the certified copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator,

¶42

¶43

A.R.No.63/2024

¶44

with a copy of the said statement appended to it, retaining the original of the same by this Court.

¶45

v) The fees of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Act.

¶46

vi) The learned Arbitrator shall decide the manner in which the fees and expenses of the arbitration proceeding has to be paid by the parties.

¶47

vii) The parties will appear before the learned Arbitrator on such date and place as decided by the learned Arbitrator.

¶48

viii) As the seat of Arbitration is at Thalassery, Kerala as per Annexure-A, the seat and venue will be at Thalassery, as per the convenience of the Arbitrator.

(sd/-)

G.GIRISH, JUDGE

jsr

A.R.No.63/2024

APPENDIX OF AR 63/2024

¶55

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶56

Annexure A TRUE COPY OF THE HYPOTHECATION CUM-LOAN AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND RESPONDENTS DATED 18-02-2019

¶57

Annexure B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P.(ARB) NO.757 OF 2022 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT COURT-III, THALASSERY, DATED 9-06-2023

¶58

Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE ISSUED BY THE APPLICANT DATED 28-09-2023

¶59

Annexure DTRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS DATED 29-09-2023

¶60

Annexure ETRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD SIGNED BY
RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 5-10-2023

M/S. Shriram Finance Limited v. Junaid.v.K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Shriram Finance Limited v. Junaid.v.K

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

Sabu P. B Vs Ghalasi Crane and Transport Service

M/S. Ghalasi Crane and Transport Service Vs Sabu P.V.

Varghese John, Vs K.a.Thomas

M/S. Stohos Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (Sidco)

M/S. Stohos Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (Sidco)

Travancore Rural Development Producer Company Ltd. Vs Divya Lekshmi Sanal