Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
Prabhasini Barik – Appellant
Versus
Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Service Limited, Mumbai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the loan agreement and insurance. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. petitioner's challenge to arbitration. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. opposite party’s defense regarding arbitration. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. court's reasoning on writ jurisdiction. (Para 15 , 16 , 22) |
| 5. legal standards for interfering with arbitration orders. (Para 21 , 26) |
| 6. maintainability of writ petitions. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. defining public duty in private lending. (Para 32 , 34 , 35) |
| 8. outcome of the petition and court's decision. (Para 42 , 46) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The present writ proceedings arise from a challenge to the order dated 22.3.2025 passed in Arbitration Petition No. MHF/144042/L10/2025 by the Learned Sole Arbitrator, Shri Vinod Kumar Gandhi.
2. The factual background reveals that Late Pabitra Barik had purchased the aforementioned Maruti Swift ZXI vehicle on 28.10.2023, availing a loan of Rs. 8,22,207/- from Opposite Party No.1, Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Limited. The Loan Agreementdetails the contractual obligations of the borrower, including repayment over 60 monthly instalments and the governing clauses, notably Clause 25, which exclusively vests territorial jurisdiction in t
Judicial intervention in arbitration matters is limited; grievances arising from private loan agreements should utilize statutory remedies and not public law actions.
Writ jurisdiction is not applicable for disputes arising from private loans, emphasizing that private financial institutions do not act as public authorities and contractual agreements cannot invoke ....
Judicial interference in arbitration proceedings under Articles 226 and 227 is limited to exceptional circumstances, emphasizing respect for arbitral awards and the need to minimize court involvement....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for exceptional circumstances to invoke the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227, the limitations on judicial interference in ar....
The Arbitral Tribunal has the power to rule on its own jurisdiction, including ruling on any objections with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement, and for that purpose, a....
The court emphasized that limitation is a jurisdictional issue in arbitration, and mere disagreement with findings does not warrant interference under supervisory jurisdiction.
Judicial interference under Article 227 is limited in arbitration matters, especially when a comprehensive mechanism exists under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for addressing non-arbitrability....
Section 12 sets out grounds of challenge to person appointed as arbitrator and duty of an arbitrator appointed, to disclose any disqualification he may have.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
