Allowed

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. v. Sulaikha Tk

Madras HC3 Feb 2026Arb Appln/1602/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court appointed theapplicant's Legal Manager as receiver to seize a vehicle in the respondent's possession under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, permitting breaking of premises with police aid if required.

What did the court decide?

Appointed Ms. Anupama Balakrishnan as receiver with authority to seize vehicle by breaking open premises with police assistance if needed.

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs… — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Arb Appln No. 1602 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Arb Appln No. 1602 of 2025

¶7

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co Ltd Chola Crest, C 54 and 55, Super B-4, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai

¶8

Applicant(s)

¶9

¶10

Sulaikha TK W/o.Abdulla Kunhi K, Dharul Aman, Athinhal, Manikoth Ajanur, Srambi, Masjid, Hosdurg, Kerala 671 316.

¶11

Respondent(s)

¶12

PRAYER

¶13

To appoint employee of the Applicant viz MS.ANUPAMA BALAKRISHNAN, LEGAL Manager, as Receiver to seize and take possession of the Equipment which is more fully described in the schedule to the Judges Summons which is lying in the custody of respondent or respondents men, agents, servants from respondent premises or wherever found with Police aid and break open pf premises if necessary.

¶14

For Applicant(s): Mr.D.Pradeep Kumar For Respondent(s): -

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and

¶17

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

¶18

Arb Appln No. 1602 of 2025

¶19

Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of receiver for taking possession of the vehicle from the respondent and to hand over the same to the applicant.

¶20

When the matter was taken up for hearing on 28.11.2025, notice was ordered to the respondent. Notice was also served and a learned counsel undertook to file vakalat for the respondent.

¶21

When the matter was taken up for hearing on 20.01.2026, the learned counsel for the respondent informed this Court that the vakalat has been returned by the Registry by pointing out certain defects and sought for some time to re-present the vakalat. Considering the same, the application was posted under the caption for orders today.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and carefully perused the materials available on record.

¶23

It is brought to the notice of this Court that pursuant to the

¶24

filing of the above application, trigger notice under Section 21 of Act was issued on 12.06.2025.

¶25

The specific case of the applicant is that the respondent is due

¶26

and payable a sum of Rs.2,56,091.52/- as on 11.11.2025. For this purpose,

¶27

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

¶28

Arb Appln No. 1602 of 2025

¶29

the applicant wanted to re-possess the vehicle as security. The respondent inspite of being served with the notice and also seeking some time to settle the matter with the applicant, did not come forward to settle the

¶30

matter and the learned counsel for the respondent also did not appear at the time of hearing.

¶31

Considering the above, this court is inclined to appoint Ms.Anupama Balakrishnan, Legal Manager as the receiver and the receiver is permitted to seize the vehicle from the respondent or wherever it is found and by breaking open the premises, if required with police assistance.

¶32

This Application is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

¶33

03-02-2026

¶34

rka

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

1.Sulaikha TK W/o.Abdulla Kunhi K, Dharul Aman, Athinhal, Manikoth Ajanur, Srambi, Masjid, Hosdurg, Kerala 671 316.

¶38

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

¶39

Arb Appln No. 1602 of 2025

¶40

N.ANAND VENKATESH J.

¶41

rka

¶42

Arb Appln No. 1602 of 2025

¶43

03-02-2026

¶44

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

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. v. Sulaikha Tk

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. v. Sulaikha Tk

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 Kailashnath L

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs Akhand Pratap Singh

Axis Bank Ltd. Vs Pramod v Jain

M/s IndusInd Bank Ltd. Vs S Thomsson

Prime Store Vs Sugam Vanijya Holdings Private Limited

Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. Vs C Varaprasad