Allowed

M/s Grd trucks Pvt. Ltd, Rep.by its Director Mr.Mayank Agarwal, v. M/s Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.

Madras HC18 Mar 2021OP/142/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge order appointing a new sole arbitrator to replace the impeached one, as the first respondent consented to the termination. The original petition was allowed and the connected application dismissed as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Mr. K. Gowtham Kumar, Advocate, appointed as Arbitrator; Original Petition allowed; Counter Application dismissed.

M/s Grd trucks Pvt. Ltd, Rep.by its Director Mr.Mayank Agarwal… — Arbitration | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

OP.No.142 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 18.03.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

¶6

OP.No.142 of 2021 and A.No.552 of 2021 Mr. GRD Trucks Private Ltd. Represented by its Director Mr. Mayank Agarwal Cabin No.1, 1st Floor, C-84, Lalkothi, Behind New Vidhan Sabha, Jaipur- 302015. ... Petitioner Vs 1.M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Limited Apollo Bunder, Gateway Building, Mumbai- 400001. 2. Dr. T. Ramasamy Sole Arbitrator Old No.25, New No.34, 1st Floor, Karpagambal Nagar, Mylapore, Chennai - 600004.

¶7

... Respondents

¶8

Prayer : Original Petition filed under Section 11(6), 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended for appointment of

¶9

¶10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶11

OP.No.142 of 2021

¶12

Arbitrator

¶13

a) terminate the mandate of of the 2nd respondent/Arbitrator Dr.T. Ramasamy appointed by the 1st respondent and declared as void ab initio and consequently appointing an independent and impartial sole arbitrator to adjudicate the claims between the petitioner and 1st respondent.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. K. Subbu Ranga Bharathi
For Respondents : Mr. V. Jeevan Ram
O R D E R
The learned counsel for the first respondent has no
objection to terminate the mandate of the sole Arbitrator, who

¶15

has been arrayed as the second respondent and he also has no

¶16

objection to a fresh Arbitrator being appointed.

¶17

Mr. K. Gowtham Kumar, Advocate, is appointed as the Arbitrator,

¶18

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶20

OP.No.142 of 2021

¶21

Accordingly, it is ordered as follows:

¶22

(i) Mr. K. Gowtham Kumar, Advocate, Old No.83 A, New

¶23

No.20 A, Luz Avenue, 5th Street, Mylapore, Chennai- 600 004, Email-id- [email protected], Mobile No- 9840667863, is appointed as the Arbitrator to enter upon reference and adjudicate

¶24

the disputes inter se the parties. The Arbitrator now appointed shall continue from the stage at which the earlier Arbitrator had concluded proceedings

¶25

ii) The learned Arbitrator may, after issuing notice to the parties

¶26

and upon hearing them, pass an award as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the order. It is open to the respondent to raise all legal objections as to the validity of contract.

¶27

iii) The learned Arbitrator is at liberty to fix his remuneration and other incidental expenses as per law.

¶28

iv) The proceedings may be conducted at the Nani Palkhivala Arbitration Centre, New D.No.22, Karpagambal Nagar, Mylapore, Chennai 600004. The Centre has been recognised as an Institution by orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice dated 19.09.2005.

¶29

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶31

OP.No.142 of 2021

¶32

The Original Petition is, accordingly, allowed, leaving the parties

¶33

to bear their own costs.

¶34

In the light of the order in OP., the A.No.552 is dismissed
as infructuous.
18.03.2021
mrn
Index: Yes/No
Speaking order/non-speaking order
To,
1.Mr. K. Gowtham Kumar, Advocate,
Old No.83 A, New No.20 A, Luz Avenue,
5th Street, Mylapore, Chennai- 600 004,
Email-id- [email protected],
Mobile No- 9840667863,

¶35

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

OP.No.142 of 2021

P.T.ASHA, J.

mrn

OP.No.142 of 2021
and
A.No.552 of 2021
18.03.2021

¶41

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

M/s Grd trucks Pvt. Ltd, Rep.by its Director Mr.Mayank Agarwal, v. M/s Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Grd trucks Pvt. Ltd, Rep.by its Director Mr.Mayank Agarwal, v. M/s Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services 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 Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Vs Mr.Rajkumar D and another

M/s Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co., Ltd. Vs Mr.Dinesh Ukabhai Makwana and another

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co.,Ltd., Vs M/s.Swathi Transport and another

V.Ganesh Vs M/s Indostar Capital Finance Limited and another

M/s.Daimler Financial Services India Pvt.Ltd, Represented by its authorised signatory Vs Bindu Kumari

Mr.Ashraf Parappummal, Vs M/s Ford Credit India Pvt. Ltd, Represented by its authorised signatory