Allowed

nissan renault financial services india Pvt. Ltd. v. Shaikh Kaleem Abdul Rashid

Madras HC7 Jan 2025Arb O.P(COM.DIV.)/450/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 11(6) to appoint an arbitrator for disputes under a loan agreement. Respondent, though objecting to the proposed arbitrator by reply e-mail, did not appear and was set ex-parte. By consent, the Court appointed a sole arbitrator instead of three and allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Sole arbitrator (Mr.Naveen Murthy) appointed to adjudicate the loan agreement dispute; petition allowed, no costs.

nissan renault financial services india Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shaikh… — Arbitration | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Arb.O.P.(Comm.Div.) No.450 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated: 07.01.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI

¶6

Arb.O.P.(Comm.Div.) No.450 of 2024

¶7

Nissan Renault Financial Services India Private Limited Registered and Corporate Office:VBC Solitaire, 5^th Floor, 47 and 9, Bazullah Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. ... Petitioner vs.

¶8

Shaikh Kaleem Abdul Rashid SR No.55 Ash Irwad Park Flat No.13A Krushna Naghar Mohammadwadi Pune Pune-411060, Maharashtra ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER : Arbitration Original Petition filed under Sections 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to appoint a sole arbitrator to adjudicate over the dispute arising out of the Loan Agreement bearing No.RUNE394827 dated 26.8.2023 between the Petitioner and the Respondent.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathya Gandhi For Mr.S.Srinivasan For Respondent : Not ready in notice

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Arbitration Original Petition has been filed under Section 11 (6) of

¶13

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

¶14

1/4

¶15

Arb.O.P.(Comm.Div.) No.450 of 2024

¶16

the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') to appoint an Arbitrator in respect of the dispute arising out of alleged violation of the Loan Agreement bearing No.RUNE394827 dated 26.8.2023 between the petitioner and the respondent company.

¶17

I have heard Mr.S.Sathya Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶18

The petitioner has filed affidavit of service evidencing paper publication

¶19

in one issue of Indian Express, Pune Edition dated 18.12.2024.

¶20

The respondent is called absent and set ex-parte.

¶21

5.. I have gone through the affidavit and also the supporting documents,

¶22

which include the loan agreement and the Loan Recall Notice dated 03.06.2024.

¶23

Though the respondent has replied to the Recall Notice and objected to

¶24

the appointment of Arbitrator as suggested by the petitioner in the letter issued by the petitioner dated 27.08.2024, the respondent has not chosen to enter appearance in the present proceedings and object for appointment of Arbitrator.

¶25

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

¶26

2/4

¶27

Arb.O.P.(Comm.Div.) No.450 of 2024

¶28

It is seen from the Reply (E-mail) sent by the respondent that the respondent admits for appointment of Arbitrator and he only objects to the letter issued by the petitioner dated 27.08.2024.

¶29

The present Original Petition has been filed under Section 11 (6) for appointment of the sole Arbitrator in respect of the dispute arising out of alleged violation of the Loan Agreement bearing No.RUNE394827 dated 26.8.2023 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Though the arbitration clause contemplates appointment of three Arbitrators, considering the scope of the dispute between the parties, both the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent submitted that it would be suffice if a sole Arbitrator is appointed. Accordingly, by consent of both sides, this Court is inclined to appoint a sole Arbitrator viz., Mr.Naveen Murthy, Advocate, S-2, 2^nd Floor, Singapore Plaza, No.164, New No.337, Linghi Chetty Street, Chennai-600 001 (Mobile No:9884740424) as the Sole Arbitrator. The sole Arbitrator is directed to enter upon reference and adjudicate the dispute in accordance with law.

¶30

The learned Arbitrator is entitled to fix his fees as per the Schedule-IV to the Act. This Court further requests the learned Arbitrator to endeavor to

¶31

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

¶32

3/4

¶33

Arb.O.P.(Comm.Div.) No.450 of 2024

¶34

P.B.BALAJI,J.,

¶35

¶36

decide the dispute as expeditiously as possible, however, not later than twelve (12) months from the date of his entering into reference.

¶37

Accordingly, this Arbitration Original Petition is allowed. No costs.

¶38

07.01.2025

¶39

¶40

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶41

Arn.O.P.(Com.Div.)No.450 of 2024

¶42

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

¶43

4/4

nissan renault financial services india Pvt. Ltd. v. Shaikh Kaleem Abdul Rashid

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

nissan renault financial services india Pvt. Ltd. v. Shaikh Kaleem Abdul Rashid

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

Re sustainability Limited Rep by its Vs Market Management Committee

Cipaca Health Care Services Private Limited Vs Medhininamo Health Care Services Private Limited

K. Purusothaman Vs P.V. Devan

Ra Vacform Industries represented by sole proprietor Mr Muraleedharan Paloran Vs Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Limited

Dr.Riyaz Mohammed Vs Eka Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Rep by its Director Jayakannan Perumal Swamy

Mr.M.S.Aleem Khan(deceased), Vs M/s.Indusind Bank Ltd.