Partly allowed

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited v. Mr.Sayyd Arif Hussain

Madras HC26 Aug 2019A/4076/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court extended the time for the appointed Receiver to execute an order to seize a vehicle lying in the respondent's custody to a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

What did the court decide?

Time is extended for a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order for the Receiver to repossess the vehicle.

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited… — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

A.No.4076 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 14.9.2020

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

Application No.4076 of 2019
Cholamandalam Investment and
Finance Company Limited
rep. By its Authorised Signatory
'Dare' House,
No.2 NSC Bose Road
Parrys
Chennai 600 001. ... Applicant
Vs
Sayyad Arif Hussain ... Respondent
Application filed under XIV Rule 8 of Original Side Rules, 1956

¶7

r/. Section 9 (ii) (a) (b) (c) (d) & (e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation

¶8

Act, 1996.

¶9

For applicant ... Mr.N.Santhosh Nagarajan
- - - - - -

¶10

Page 1 of 4

¶11

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶12

A.No.4076 of 2019

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

Instant application has been filed by the applicant/Company to

¶15

appoint employee of the applicant viz., Mr.Ravindradhar Diwan, ARM

¶16

as Receiver to seize and take possession of the vehicle, 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 or wherever found with Police aid and break open of premises if necessary.

¶17

By order dated 26/8/2019, this Court had appointed one Mr.Ravindradhar Diwan Arm, as Receiver to seize and possess the

¶18

vehicle, which is morefully described in the schedule to the Judges

¶19

Summons.

¶20

appearing for the applicant submitted that the vehicle could not be

¶21

secured and sought for extension of time for execution of order by the

¶22

Receiver and submitted that further time of three weeks may be granted

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶25

A.No.4076 of 2019

¶26

to repossess the vehicle. Accordingly, time is extended finally for a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the order granting power to repossess the vehicle shall

¶27

automatically stand cancelled.

¶28

With the above direction, the application is closed.
14.9.2020
mvs.

¶29

Page 3 of 4

¶30

http://www.judis.nic.in

A.No.4076 of 2019

N.SATHISH KUMAR,J

mvs.

Application No.4076 of 2019
14.9.2020

¶35

Page 4 of 4

¶36

http://www.judis.nic.in

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited v. Mr.Sayyd Arif Hussain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited v. Mr.Sayyd Arif Hussain

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.Daimler Financial Services Vs Lalit Kumar Babulal Tater

M/s.Globe Detective Agencies Pvt.Ltd Vs M/s.Gammon India Ltd.

M/S Daimler Financial Services Vs T.Sreedhar

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co.,Ltd., Vs Mr.Ajit Dash

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Limited Vs Mr.Sakeerhussain K

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Limited Vs Mr.Sudheerbabu at