VINOD K.SHARMA
Citicorp finance (India) Ltd Rep By Its Manager Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Padmanabhan Nair – Respondent
Vinod K. Sharma, J.
1. This application under Order XIV Rule 8 of O.S. Rules read with sec.9(ii) (e) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by M/s.Citicorp Finance India Ltd. to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to seize and deliver the subject property from the premises of the respondent with police aid and break open of premises if necessary.
2. The question to be determined in this case is "whether the provision of section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, can be invoked to use the High Court as a Recovery Agent by Finance Companies/Banks to seize the vehicle ex-parte, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondent/ borrower, by seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner, to seize the vehicle even without serving notice of petition along with the documents, so as to enable the borrower to know the reason for passing this extreme order of seizure."
3. Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 reads as under:
9.Interim measures etc. by Court.-
(a) the preservation, interim custody or sale of any goods which are the subject-matter of the arbitration agreement;
(b) securing the amount in dispute in the arbitration;
Arvind Constructions Co. (P) Ltd. vs. Kalinga Mining Corporation and others ((2007) 6 SCC 798)
ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. Prakash Kaur and others [(2007) 2 SCC 711]
M/s.NEPC India Ltd., formerly NEPC Micon Ltd., Chennai vs. M/s.Sundaram Finance Ltd.
Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. vs. S.Vijayalaxmi [(2012)1 SCC 1]
R.Justin Arulappa vs. R.Xavier Arulappa and another (2010(1) M.L.J. 1176)
House Productions Private Ltd. vs. Meediya Plus ((2005)2 M.L.J. 256)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.