Disposed

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. v. Aboobacker Siddique

Madras HC25 Sept 2025Arb Appln/1012/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A non-banking financial institution sought appointment of an Advocate Commissioner under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act to repossess a vehicle from a loan defaulter. The court earlier appointed the commissioner on terms; after repossession and initiation of arbitration, the application was disposed of with additional commissioner remuneration.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed; vehicle already seized by Advocate Commissioner and handed to applicant in interim custody; additional remuneration of Rs.15,000 directed to be paid to commissioner.

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs Aboobacker… — Arbitration | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Arb.Appln.No.1012 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 25.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Arb. Appln. No.1012 of 2025

¶7

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. 'Chola Crest', C54&55, Super B-4, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate Guindy, Chennai 600 032 Rep. by its Authorised Signatory

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Aboobacker Siddique .. Respondent

¶10

Application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules read with Section 9(1)(ii)(a)(b)(d)&(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to seize and deliver the vehicle to applicant which is morefully described in the schedule to the Judges Summons which is lying in the custody of respondent or respondent's men, agents, servants from respondent premises or wherever found with police aid and break open of premises if necessary.

¶11

For applicant : Mr.D.Pradeep Kumar

¶12

1/6

¶13

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

¶14

Arb.Appln.No.1012 of 2025

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This application has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and

¶17

Conciliation Act, 1996, for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to seize and deliver the vehicle from the respondent to the applicant.

¶18

When the matter came up for hearing on 29.07.2025, this Court passed the following order:

¶19

“This application has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, seeking for appointment of an advocate commissioner to repossess the vehicle from the respondent or wherever available.

¶20

The applicant is a non banking financial institution. They lent money to the respondent under an agreement for loan dated 24.03.2023. The respondent has committed default in the repayment of the loan as per the said agreement. The applicant has also recalled the loan through their loan recall notice dated 14.05.2025. They have also filed a statement of account dated 02.07.2025. As seen from the same, Rs.4,69,542.59 is due and payable by the respondent to the applicant. The said amount includes the future installments, penal interest and other incidental charges. However, as on date, the respondent is in arrears of installments, which amounts to Rs.1,28,300/-.

¶21

Under the agreement for loan dated 24.03.2023, the applicant is empowered to repossess the vehicle from the respondent in case they commit default in the repayment of the loan. The applicant has expressed its difficulties to repossess the vehicle on their own. Under those circumstances, they have filed this application, seeking for appointment of an advocate commissioner to repossess the vehicle. The applicant has also undertaken to initiate arbitration in accordance with clause 29 of the agreement for loan dated 24.03.2023.

¶22

This Court, after giving due consideration to the averments

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

Arb.Appln.No.1012 of 2025

¶26

contained in the affidavit filed in support of this application and after giving due consideration to the documents filed along with this application, is of the considered view that since the respondent is a defaulter in the repayment of loan, this Court is inclined to appoint an advocate commissioner as prayed for in this application. However, in order to enable the respondent to run the vehicle even after repossession by the advocate commissioner, this Court is putting the respondent on terms. According to the applicant, a sum of Rs.1,28,300/- is due and payable by the respondent to the applicant towards arrears of installments i.e., 12.23 installments have not been paid by the respondent to the applicant till date.

¶27

For the foregoing reasons, this Court issues the following directions:

¶28

a) A. Lakshmi Sundaram, Advocate having address at No.220, 5th Cross Street, 8th Street, Bharathway Nagar, PTC Quarters, Manimangalam Road, Chennai - 600 048 (Mob. No.89390 74533) is appointed as the advocate commissioner to reposses the vehicle morefully described in the schedule to the Judges Summons from the respondent from his premises or wherever available;

¶29

b) The advocate commissioner after re-possessing the vehicle, shall handover interim custody of the same to the applicant, who shall keep it in their safe custody;

¶30

c) The advocate commissioner, immediately after repossessing the subject vehicle, shall intimate the respondent either through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due (RPAD) or by hand delivery through a written communication, that the arrears of installments works out to Rs.1,28,300/-;

¶31

d) The respondent on payment of Rs.1,28,300/- to the applicant within a period of three days from the date when the subject vehicle was repossessed, is entitled for return of the seized vehicle, provided an undertaking is given by the respondent that the respondent shall pay the future installments on the due dates, without any default. On receipt of the sum of Rs.1,28,300/- within the stipulated time as stated supra, the applicant shall redeliver the subject vehicle back to the respondent with proper acknowledgment and the advocate commissioner shall also render proper assistance for the same;

¶32

e) The applicant shall initiate arbitration in accordance with

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

Arb.Appln.No.1012 of 2025

¶36

the arbitration agreement contained in the contract within a period of 90 days from today. In case, the applicant fails to initiate arbitration within the stipulated time, the order passed by this Court today shall stand automatically vacated and the re-possessed vehicle shall also be redelivered back to the respondent by the applicant unconditionally;

¶37

f) In case, the advocate commissioner requires Police assistance due to any law and order problem or due to any obstruction caused by the respondent or by any third party, while re-possessing the vehicle, the advocate commissioner is at liberty to seek police assistance from the concerned police station and the police department shall grant police protection accordingly. In case, break open of the premises, where the vehicle is located, is required, the advocate commissioner shall break open the premises in the presence of the police and take an inventory and thereafter re-posses the vehicle;

¶38

g) The advocate commissioner shall be paid an initial remuneration of Rs.25,000/- and on receipt of the same, the advocate commissioner shall proceed to execute this order. All the boarding, lodging and travelling expenses for the advocate commissioner shall be borne by the applicant.

¶39

Notice to the respondent, returnable by 28.08.2025. Private Notice is also permitted.”

¶40

Pursuant to the above order, the learned Advocate Commissioner has

¶41

seized the vehicle and has handed over the same to the representative of the applicant company. A report has also been filed by the learned Advocate Commissioner in this regard.

¶42

The notice that was sent to the respondent has been returned with an

¶43

4/6

¶44

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

¶45

Arb.Appln.No.1012 of 2025

¶46

endorsement “addressee out of station”. An affidavit of service has also been filed in this regard.

¶47

Considering the fact that the vehicle has already been seized and handed over to the representative of the applicant company by the learned Advocate Commissioner and the arbitration proceedings have also been initiated and it is pending, no further orders are required to be passed in this application.

¶48

The applicant company is directed to pay additional remuneration of Rs.15,000/- to the learned Advocate Commissioner.

¶49

This application is disposed of in the above terms.

25.09.2025

gya

5/6

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

¶54

Arb.Appln.No.1012 of 2025

¶55

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶56

gya

¶57

Arb. Appln. No.1012 of 2025

¶58

25.09.2025

¶59

6/6

¶60

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

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. v. Aboobacker Siddique

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. v. Aboobacker Siddique

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

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs Zulaikha Motors Private Limited

S.B.Bhuvanendra Vs M/S.India Infoline Ltd.

Shri Prasanna Venkatesa Perumal Devasthanam Vs The Commissioner

Flavorite Technologies Private Limited Vs Raman Dhoot

Mr.D.Muthu Kumar, S/o. Durairaj Vs M/s Sai Sravanthi Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd, Rep by its Director

White Cloud Shipping Pte Ltd. Vs Garuda Mineralia Private Limited