Disposed

Five Star Business Finance Limited v. Shaik Khaja

Madras HC3 Nov 2025Arb O.P(COM.DIV.)/583/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Loan agreement disputes referred to arbitration. The Court found a valid arbitration clause in the loan agreement dated 14.11.2022, noted compliance with the pre-arbitration notice, and appointed C.K.Chandrasekkar as sole Arbitrator to enter upon reference and render an award, with fees per MHCAC Rules 2017. Petition disposed without costs.

What did the court decide?

Sole Arbitrator (Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar) appointed under Section 11(5) to adjudicate disputes under the loan agreement dated 14.11.2022; no order as to costs.

Five Star Business Finance Limited Vs Shaik Khaja — Arbitration | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶7

Five Star Business Finance Limited Rep by its Legal Officer Mr.MadhuSandanSomeswaran, Registered Office at New No.27, Old No.4, Taylors Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-600010.

¶8

Petitioner

¶9

¶10

Shaik Khaja

¶11

H.No.2-15 Suleman Nagar Kotagiri Rudrur, Nizamabad Telangana-503188.

¶12

Ahmed Bee

¶13

H.No.2-15 Suleman Nagar Kotagiri Rudrur, Nizamabad Telangana-503188.

¶14

Raziya Begum H.No.2-15 Suleman Nagar Kotagiri Rudrur, Nizamabad Telangana-503188.

¶15

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

¶16

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶17

Shaik Mujahid H.No.2-15 Suleman Nagar Kotagiri Rudrur, Nizamabad Telangana-503188. Respondents

¶18

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

¶19

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶20

PRAYER

¶21

To appoint an Arbitrator to decide the disputes and differences between the Petitioner and Respondent in terms of Loan Agreement dated 14.11.2022

¶22

For Petitioner: Mr.P.H.Vinodh Pandian

¶23

For Respondents: No appearance

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This original petition has been filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate and decide the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents arising out of the loan agreement dated 14.11.2022.

¶26

When this petition came up for hearing on 19.09.2025, this Court, considering the fact that a dispute has arisen between the petitioner and the respondents out of the loan agreement dated 14.11.2022 and there exists an arbitration clause in the loan agreement, which is reproduced below,

¶27

“Article 10: Arbitration

¶28

All disputes, differences, and/or claims arising out of this Agreement, whether during its subsistence or thereafter shall be settled by “Arbitration” in accordance with the provisions of the “Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996” (Act 26 of 1996) or any other statutory amendments thereof and shall be referred to the Sole Arbitration of an “Arbitrator”, whose appointment shall be made mutually by the Parties. It is a term of this agreement that in the event of such an Arbitrator to whom the matter has been referred to originally dies or being

¶29

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

¶30

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶31

unable or unwilling to act for any reason, then in such event, the Parties shall appoint a substitute sole arbitrator mutually. Such person, when appointed as Arbitrator, shall be entitled to proceed with the reference, from the stage at which it was left by his predecessor. The venue of the Arbitration proceedings shall be in Chennai”,

¶32

and that the petitioner had complied with the statutory requirements of Section 21 of the Act by issuing notice to the respondent on 11.03.2025, issued notice to the respondents through Court as well as privately returnable by 27.10.2025.

¶33

Pursuant to the above order, the private notice that was sent to the respondents has been served and affidavit of service has also been filed. Even though the names of the respondents are printed in the cause list, there is no appearance either in person or through counsel.

¶34

It is seen that there is a valid agreement between the parties in line with Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which contains an arbitration clause. Hence, Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar, Advocate, having address for service at Chamber 279, New Addl Law Chambers, High Court Buildings Chennai, Mobile No.9444184899, email: [email protected] is appointed as the sole Arbitrator and the learned Arbitrator is requested to enter upon reference qua the loan agreement dated 14.11.2022, adjudicate the arbitral disputes that have arisen between the parties by holding the sittings in any venue in Chennai to the convenience of all concerned and render an award. Fees of the sole Arbitrator shall be in accordance with the Madras High Court

¶35

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

¶36

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶37

Arbitration Centre (MHCAC)(Administrative Cost and Arbitrator's Fees) Rules 2017.

¶38

This original petition is disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶39

03-11-2025

¶40

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶41

¶42

¶43

Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar Chamber 279 New Addl Law Chambers High Court Buildings Chennai Mobile No.9444184899 email: [email protected]

¶44

The Director Tamil Nadu Mediation and Conciliation Centre-cum-Ex-Officio Member Madras High Court Arbitration Centre Chennai 600 104

¶45

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

¶46

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶47

N.ANAND VENKATESH J.

¶48

¶49

Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 583 of 2025

¶50

03-11-2025

¶51

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

Five Star Business Finance Limited v. Shaik Khaja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Five Star Business Finance Limited v. Shaik Khaja

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

P.Arun Vijay Vs Mrs. Dhanalakshmi

E.Varadhan Vs M/s.Jans. n Infrastructure (P) Ltd.

M. Chandramohan Vs Mrs. P.Amudha, I.A.S.

Five Star Business Finance Limited Vs S Kantha Rao

M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Vs K.Baby Santhi

M/s Shanvi Enterprises Vs M/s Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited