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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 1819

G.R.SWAMINATHAN
Sundaram Finance Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
P. Sakthivel – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M.S. Krishnan, for Mr. Pon Senthil Kumaran

ORDER :

M/s. Sundaram Finance Ltd., is the Revision petitioner herein. It had entered into a loan agreement with the first respondent herein on 07.10.2014. A vehicle was hypothecated in favour of the Revision petitioner as the first charge. The second respondent herein is the guarantor. The loan amount of Rs.7,38,224/- was repayable in 47 monthly installments. The first respondent, however, committed default. As a result, the hypothecated vehicle was seized on 30.08.2016 and sold. Even after the appropriation of the sale proceeds, the amount due under the contract was Rs.2,37,932/-. Since the first respondent did not pay the same despite demand, arbitration proceedings were initiated as per Article 22 of the loan agreement. A Claim statement was filed on 19.04.2017 before Sri. V.K. Thirunavukkarasu, a retired District Judge, who was nominated as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute/claim between the parties.

2. The Sole Arbitrator passed an interim order dated 26.07.2017 under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, attaching the property of the respondents as they failed to furnish security as ordered by the Arbitral Tribunal on 31.05.2017. A copy of the s









































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