Disposed

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment v. Bajirao Ramchandra Mane

Madras HC26 Sept 2016A/3624/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an application regarding seized vehicle and pending arbitration. It directed the applicant to pay an additional ₹10,000 fee to the Advocate Commissioner and restricted alienation of the vehicle until the Arbitrator orders, while reserving the respondent's right to seek vacation of orders.

What did the court decide?

Applicant directed to pay Rs.10,000 extra fee to Advocate Commissioner; restrained from alienating vehicle pending Arbitrator's orders; parties permitted to file under Section 17 of Arbitration Act, 1

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment Vs Bajirao Ramchandra Mane — Arbitration | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

Application No.3624 of 2016

¶3

RAJIV SHAKDHER,J

¶4

Learned Advocate Commissioner has filed a report dated 22.09.2016.

¶5

I am informed by the learned counsel for the applicant that the subject vehicle has been seized by the learned Advocate Commissioner and the same has been handed over to the applicant.

¶6

In these circumstances, it has to be noted that the respondent has not appeared before this Court, despite service.

¶7

I am informed by the learned Advocate Commissioner, who is present in Court, as well as by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that, at the initial stage, a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards fee was paid. Request is made by the learned Advocate Commissioner for payment of additional remuneration in the sum of Rs.40,000/-, as the warrant was executed in Pune.

¶8

Having regard to the overall circumstances, an additional fee equivalent to a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) will be paid to the learned Advocate Commissioner by the applicant, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶9

¶10

RAJIV SHAKDHER,J.

¶11

vsm

¶12

I am informed that the Arbitration Proceedings were initiated and are pending adjudication.

¶13

The above Application is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶14

7.1) The applicant will not alienate or sell or create any third party rights in the subject vehicle, till further orders of the learned Arbitrator.

¶15

7.2) Needless to say that parties will be at liberty, hereafter, to file an Application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator will, however, issue notice to the respondent, if not already done so, before proceeding further in the matter.

¶16

It is made clear that the respondent will be at liberty to seek vacation or modification of the orders passed by this Court. In such an eventuality, the learned Arbitrator shall pass appropriate orders, albeit, in accordance with law.

¶17

26.09.2016

¶18

vsm

¶19

Application No.3624 of 2016

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment v. Bajirao Ramchandra Mane

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment v. Bajirao Ramchandra Mane

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

Wealth Tree Advisors Pvt.Ltd., Vs Infinitas Energy Solutions

Shanthini Jayakrishnan Vs v. Ramesh Kumar

The Kerala Volleyball Vs Volleyball Federations of

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Vs M/s.Orchid Pharma Limited

M/S. Cholamandalam Investment Vs Mr. Ajith a

L & T Finance Ltd. Vs Mr. Vankayalapati Chalapati