Disposed

M/s. Cholamandalam Investment v. Mr. Saroja Kumar Behera (Decd)

Madras HC21 Jan 2016A/1942/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court closed an application seeking an Advocate Commissioner to enforce an ex-parte arbitral award. Noting the award remained unchallenged and the respondent neglected to approach the applicant for settlement, the Court directed closure, discharged the commissioner, and allowed the applicant to proceed legally.

What did the court decide?

Application closed; Learned Advocate Commissioner discharged; Finance Company directed to proceed further.

M/s. Cholamandalam Investment Vs Mr. Saroja Kumar Behera (Decd) — Arbitration | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) THURSDAY, THE 21st DAY OF JANUARY 2016 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR

¶4

A.NO.1942 OF 2015

¶5

In the matter of Arbitration And Conciliation Act 1996 and In The Matter of Disputes Between Cholamadalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd. And Mr.Saroja Kumar Behera Arising under Loan Agreement No.XVFPBNR00000664102 Dated 26.11.2011 M/s.Cholamandalam Investment and Finace Company Limited 'Dare House'No.2 N.S.C.Bose Road Parrys Chennai-600 001 Represented by its Authorised Signatory ... Applicant -Versus1.Mr.Saroja Kumar Behera(Deceased) S/o.Muralidhara Behera AT/PO Kantilo, PS Khandapada Gania, Nayagarh,(Near Khandesun Temple) Khandaparagarh, Orissa-752 078

¶6

*** 2.Mrs.Pramsdini Behera W/o Muralidhara Behera AT/PO Kantilo, PS Khandapada Gania, Nayagarh,(Near Khandesun Temple) Khandaparagarh, Orissa-752 078 (2**^nd Respondent brought on record as legal heirs of the deceased Responded as per order dated 21/08/2015 in A.no.4681 of 2015.)

¶7

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶8

... Respondent

¶9

¶10

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be please to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to seize and deliver the vehicle to applicant which is more fully described in the schedule to the judges summons which is lying in the custody of respondent or his men, agents, servants from his premises at AT/PO Kantilo, PS Khandapada, Gania, Nayagarh, (Near Khandesn Temple), Khandaparagarh, Orissa-752 078 or wherever found with Police aid and break open of premises if neceassary and pass such other order or orders as may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶11

This application coming on this day before this court for hearing court made the following order:

¶12

Material on record discloses that on the dispute between the applicant and the respondent, an ex-parte Award dated 06.01.2015, in D. No. 104 of 2013, has been passed. Enclosing the same in the typeset of papers and invoking Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the present Application No.

¶13

1942 of 2015 has been filed, for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to seize and repossess the vehicle.

¶14

Record of proceedings would show that on

¶15

17.03.2015, this Court has appointed an Advocate

¶16

Commissioner. On 23.09.2015, when the matter came up for hearing, after recording the submission of the

¶17

learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

borrower, this Court has passed the following order:-

¶19

¶20

“ Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the respondent is willing to settle the dispute as per the award passed in favour of the applicant, however, he needs sometime. Post the matter after six weeks. In the meantime, the applicant is directed not to dispose of the vehicle. It is open to the respondent to approach the applicant in the meantime and negotiate for settling the matter. 2. The Advocate Commissioner has filed a report stating that in pursuant to the warrant issued by this Court, he seized the vehicle and handed over the same to the applicant. He has further sought for additional remuneration.

¶21

3. Considering the report filed by the

¶22

Advocate Commissioner and also a memo

¶23

seeking additional remuneration, this Court is of the view that he is entitled to get an

¶24

additional remuneration of Rs.20,000/-.

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

Accordingly, the applicant is directed to

¶27

¶28

pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty

¶29

thousand only) as additional remuneration to the Advocate Commissioner within seven days from today.”

¶30

Thereafter the matter is listed today.

¶31

Added further, Mr. N. Santhosh Nagarajan, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that though the borrower is aware of the Award dated 06.01.2015, the same has not been challenged. The respondent/ borrower has not approached the Finance Company for settlement or payment. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is placed on record.

¶32

Today, there is no representation for the

¶33

respondent/ borrower. In as much as, the award remains unchallenged and cannot be challenged at this juncture, beyond the period provided for and since there is no opposition to the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that within the time provided for, the borrower, has not approached the Finance company for settlement, no purpose would be served in keeping the Application pending.

¶34

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶35

¶36

In view of the above, the Application is closed. It is open to the Finance Company to proceed further, in accordance with law. Learned Advocate Commissioner shall stand discharged.

¶37

sd/.S.M.K.J
21.01.2016
//Certified to be a true copy//
Dated this the day of 2016.
S.s/09.08.2016 COURT OFFICER
From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of
the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.

¶38

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/s. Cholamandalam Investment v. Mr. Saroja Kumar Behera (Decd)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Cholamandalam Investment v. Mr. Saroja Kumar Behera (Decd)

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

M/s.Lic Housing Finance Ltd., Vs M/s.Riverside Infrastructure

Arvind Green Infra Private Vs

A.Pavadai Vs Apvrva Varma

Abirami Financial Services Vs

M/s. Electronica Finance Ltd. Vs Jai Shree Polyplast Pvt. Ltd.

L & T Finance Ltd. Vs mr. srinivas r goundi