SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV NARULA
De Lage Landen Financial Services India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Parhit Diagnostic Private Limited – Respondent


JUDGMENT

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral):--The Petitioner-lender seeks adjudication of disputes that have arisen in relation to a loan transaction with the Respondent-borrower. Since the Arbitration Clause, as worded, gives unilateral right of appointment to the Petitioner-lender, which is impermissible under the scheme of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter, `the Act'], the present petition has been filed under Section 11 (4) and 11(6) of the Act for appointment of an independent Sole Arbitrator.

BRIEF FACTS

2. The facts leading up to the filing of the present petition are encapsulated in brief, as follows: -

2.1. The parties entered into a Loan and Hypothecation Agreement dated 31st July, 2018 for a sum of Rs. 1,65,15,000/-. The loan was disbursed in two tranches, which were identified under separate loan account numbers. In order to secure the loan, Respondent No. 2 (Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Mishra) and Respondent No. 3 (Mr. Satya Prakash), being Directors of Respondent No. 1-Company, executed two separate Guarantee Agreements also dated 31st July, 2018, in their personal capacity, undertaking to repay the entire dues, as and when demanded by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top