Disposed

Mr.C.P.Venkatasalam v. M/S.Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.

Madras HC3 Dec 2020OP/242/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of two original petitions filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging an ex parte arbitral award. The High Court disposed of both petitions by accepting settlement memos filed by all parties involved.

What did the court decide?

The two original petitions were disposed of on the terms of the accepted settlement memos with no order as to costs.

Mr.C.P.Venkatasalam Vs M/S.Kotak Mahindra… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 03.12.2020

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶6

O.P.Nos.242 and 266 of 2015
O.P.No.242 of 2015
Mr.C.P.Venkatesan
No.20, Nanjappa Nagar
2 nd Street West
Singanallur, Coimbatore
Pin: 641 005 ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. M/s.Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.,
Rep. By its Authorised Signatory
2 nd Floor, 3 Dass India Tower
2 nd Line Beach, Parrys
Chennai – 600 001
2.D.Saravanan
Sole Arbitrator
Orient Chambers
4 th Floor, No.90/73, Armenian Street
Chennai – 600 001
3. Mr.N.Sathish Kumar .. Respondents

¶7

Original Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to set aside the ex parte award of the sole Arbitrator / 2^nd Respondent passed in A.C.P (Kotak) No.301 of 2010 dated 15.12.2014 as against the Petitioner with cost and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶8

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶9

1/12

¶10

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Navaneetha Krishnan

¶12

For Respondents : Mr.Kiran Krishnan for Mr.K.Moorthy for R1 No appearance for R3

¶13

O.P.No.266 of 2015

¶14

Ms.N.Sathish Kumar
Sri Murugan Motors and Earth Movers
No.593-1, NH 47, Gold Coins Avinashi Road
Civil Airodrome Post, Coimbatore
Pin: 641 014 ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. M/s.Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.,
Rep. By its Authorised Signatory
2 nd Floor, 3 Dass India Tower
2 nd Line Beach, Parrys
Chennai – 600 001
2.D.Saravanan
Sole Arbitrator
Orient Chambers
4 th Floor, No.90/73, Armenian Street
Chennai – 600 001
3. Mr.C.P.Venketasalam ... Respondents

¶15

Original Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to set aside the ex parte award of the sole Arbitrator / 2^nd Respondent passed in A.C.P (Kotak) No.301 of 2010 dated 15.12.2014 as against the Petitioner herein with cost and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravanan For Respondents : Mr.Kiran Krishnan

¶17

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶18

2/12

¶19

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶20

for Mr.K.Moorthy for R1 No appearance for R3

¶21

COMMON ORDER

¶22

Mr.Navaneethakrishnan, learned counsel on record for petitioner in

¶23

O.P.No.242 of 2015, Mr.S.Saravanan, learned counsel on record for

¶24

petitioner in O.P.No.256 of 2015 and Mr.Kiran, learned counsel

¶25

representing Mr.K.Moorthy, counsel on record for contesting first respondent Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., in both the captioned 'Original Petitions' ('OPs' in plural and ÓP'in singular for the sake of brevity) are before me in this web-hearing on a video-conferencing platform. To be noted, captioned OPs are listed under the cause list caption ‘FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT’.

¶26

The aforementioned three counsel make a common submission

¶27

in unison that both captioned OPs have been filed challenging the same arbitral award, namely 'award dated 15.12.2014 bearing reference A.C.P (Kotak) No.301 of 2010', (hereinafter ‘impugned award’ for the sake of brevity and convenience). All the learned counsel submit that while O.P.No.242 of 2015 is at the instance of borrower, O.P.No.266 of 2015 is

¶28

at the instance of guarantor. Two separate memos (one in each OP), but with the same terms and annexures have been filed. The scanned copy of

¶29

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶30

3/12

¶31

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶32

the memo and annexures is as follows:

¶33

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶34

4/12

¶35

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶36

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶37

5/12

¶38

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶39

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶40

6/12

¶41

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶42

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶43

7/12

¶44

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶45

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶46

8/12

¶47

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶48

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶49

9/12

¶50

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶51

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶52

10/12

¶53

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶54

All the aforementioned three counsel submit in unison that

¶55

captioned OPs can be closed by recording the aforementioned memos together with annexures evidencing settlement (scanned and reproduced above). Though obvious it is made clear that aforementioned memo and annex ures will stand substituted in place of the impugned award and govern the parties from hereon.

¶56

The memos, both dated 19.11.2020 filed in the captioend OPs
and the annexurs evidencing settlement shall form part of this common
order.
Both captioned OPs disposed of on above terms. There shall be no
order as to costs.
03.12.2020
gpa

¶57

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶58

11/12

¶59

O.P.Nos.266 and 242 of 2015

¶60

M.SUNDAR.J.,

¶61

gpa

¶62

O.P.Nos.242 and 266 of 2015
03.12.2020

¶63

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶64

12/12

Mr.C.P.Venkatasalam v. M/S.Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.C.P.Venkatasalam v. M/S.Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.

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. Sunvesta Exporters Pvt. Ld, Rep.by its Director Mr.Manish v Desale, Vs M/s. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.

M/s Ns Automotive Spares Pvt. Ltd, a private limited company, Vs M/s Ashok Leyland Ltd, a Private Limited Company

M/s.Gita Power and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Represented by its authorised signatory Vs M/s.Enexio power cooling solutions India Private Limited

Arihant Foundations and Housing Limited Vs Pvp Ventures Limited (Formerly Known as Ssi Limited) and 2 others

The Official Liquidator,Madras as the as the Liquidator ofM/s. Stora Enso Inpac Delta India Private Vs nil

Income Tax Department, Tax Recovery Officer-2, Vs The Official Liquidator