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

2013 Supreme(Mad) 1563

VINOD K.SHARMA
Sundaram Finance Limited – Appellant
Versus
P. C. Benny – Respondent


Judgment :

This application under Order 14 Rule 8 of O.S. Rules read with section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to seize and deliver a 2007 Model TATA INDICA bearing Chassis No.600142CSZP49776 and Engine No.475ID105CSZP48351 and Registration No.KL 41 9951 to the custody of the applicant. The prayer is also made to obtain Police aid and to break open the premises.

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 agree
























































































































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