Allowed

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

Madras HC18 Mar 2021OP/86/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought termination of the existing Arbitrator under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act following Perkins Eastman. The court terminated the mandate of the 5th respondent and appointed Mr. R. Venkatavaradan as the new Arbitrator to continue proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Termination of the 5th respondent's mandate and appointment of Mr. R. Venkatavaradan to adjudicate disputes within six months.

Mr.Ashraf Parappummal, Vs M/s Ford Credit India Pvt. Ltd… — Arbitration | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

OP.No.86 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

O.P.No.86 of 2021
and
A.No.279 of 2021
Mr. Ashraf Parappummal
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M/s. Ford Credit India Pvt. Ltd.
Represented by its Authorised Signatory
Having Office at
4th Floor, 4B Campus, RMZ Millenia,
Dr, MGR Road, Perungudi,
Chennai - 600 096, Tamil Nadu.
2. M/s. Continental Cars Pvt. Ltd.
Represented by its Director
Mr. Shabeen Perumbadi Mohammed Ali
Building No PP/V/7F, Panangangara,
38, Mile, Ramauram, P.O. Makkaraparamba
Malappuram, Kerala - 679321.
3. Mr. Shabeen Peumbadi Mohammed Ali
4. Mr. Shanil Mohammed Ali

¶7

1/6

¶8

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

¶9

OP.No.86 of 2021

¶10

Mr. N. C. Ramesh, Senior Advocate, Learned Arbitrator, (Arbitration Case 2/2020) No.6/47, North Road, Behind Nandhi Statute, West CIT Nagar, Chennai- 600 035.

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Original Petition filed under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to a) terminate the mandate of Arbitration proceedings vide Arbitration Case No.2 of 2020 on the file of 5th respondent; b) appoint a new Arbitrator;

¶13

For Petitioner : Ms. B. Shruthan
For Respondents : Mr. C. Ramesh for R1
Mr. Clint Li Johny for R2 and R3
O R D E R

¶14

The above petition has been filed to terminate the mandate of the Arbitrator who is arrayed as the 5th respondent based on the Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ' Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. vs. HSCC (India) Ltd. reported in [(2019)

¶15

2/6

¶16

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

¶17

OP.No.86 of 2021

¶18

SCC Online SC 1517]", as it is violative of the 7th Schedule of the

¶19

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶20

Considering the above, the mandate granted to the 5th

¶21

respondent is terminated.

¶22

The counsels would submit that the Court may appoint
another Arbitrator.

¶23

Mr. R. Venkatavaradan, Advocate, is appointed as the
Arbitrator.
4. Accordingly, it is ordered as follows:

¶24

(i) Mr. R. Venkatavaradan, Advocate, No.14, Rama Rao Road,

¶25

Mylapore, Chennai - 600004, email id- [email protected], is appointed as the Arbitrator to enter upon reference and adjudicate the

¶26

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

¶27

3/6

¶28

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

¶29

OP.No.86 of 2021

¶30

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

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice dated 19.09.2005.

¶35

Considering the order passed in OP.No.86 of 2021, nothing survives for consideration in A.No.279 of 2021 and it is therefore dismissed as infructuous.

¶36

18.03.2021

¶37

mrn

¶38

Index: Yes/No Speaking order/non-speaking order

¶39

4/6

¶40

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

¶41

OP.No.86 of 2021

¶42

To,

¶43

M/s. Ford Credit India Pvt. Ltd. Represented by its Authorised Signatory Having Office at 4th Floor, 4B Campus, RMZ Millenia, Dr, MGR Road, Perungudi, Chennai - 600 096, Tamil Nadu. 2. M/s. Continental Cars Pvt. Ltd. Represented by its Director Mr. Shabeen Perumbadi Mohammed Ali Building No PP/V/7F, Panangangara, 38, Mile, Ramauram, P.O. Makkaraparamba Malappuram, Kerala - 679321. 3. Mr. N. C. Ramesh, Senior Advocate, Learned Arbitrator, (Arbitration Case 2/2020) No.6/47, North Road, Behind Nandhi Statute, West CIT Nagar, Chennai- 600 035. 4. Mr. R. Venkatavaradan, Advocate, No.14, Rama Rao Road, Mylapore, Chennai - 600004, Email id- [email protected]

¶44

5/6

¶45

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

OP.No.86 of 2021

P.T.ASHA, J.

mrn

O.P.No.86 of 2021
and
A.No.279 of 2021
18.03.2021

¶50

6/6

¶51

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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