23 CARAP 19-21.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

COMM. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 19 OF 2021

Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd.

..Applicant

Vs.

Suresh Kumar Singh

.. Respondent

…..

Mr. Shailesh Prajapati i/b Dua Associates AOR for the Applicant.

…..

CORAM :- B.P.COLABAWALLA, J.

DATE :- DECEMBER 14, 2021.

P. C.:

1.

The above Arbitration Application is filed under Section 11

of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the Arbitration

Act”) seeking the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal to decide the

disputes and differences between the Applicant and the Respondent

arising out of the Working Capital Demand Loan Agreement/Channel

Finance Agreement dated 13^th September, 2016.

2.

The Arbitration Agreement between the parties can be

found at clause 20 of the Working Capital Demand Loan Agreement

which reads thus:

Laxmi 1/5

LAXMI

SUBHASH

SONTAKKE

Digitally signed by

LAXMI SUBHASH

SONTAKKE

Date: 2021.12.15

18:15:45 +0530

23 CARAP 19-21.doc

“20.ARBITRATION

In the event of any dispute or differences or clai

ms ari

sing

directly or indirectly out of thi

s agreement or in relati

on to

any other documents executed in connection wi

th the

Facility or otherwise, the Parties undertake to use all

reasonable endeavors to resolve such disputes ami

cably. If

disputes and di

fferences and/or clai

ms cannot be settled

amicably, then all disputes and differences and/or clai

ms

arising between the Parties hereto in connection with thi

s

Agreement or the interpretation hereof or anythi

ng done or

omitted to be done pursuant hereto or the performance or

non-performance of thi

s Agreement shall be referred to

arbitration. Such disputes, differences and/or clai

ms ari

sing

out of thi

s presents or as to the construction, meani

ng or

effect hereof or as to the rights and liabilities of the parti

es

hereunder shall be settled by arbitration to be held at

Mumbai in accordance with the provisions of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory

amendments thereof or any statute enacted for

replacement therefor and shall be referred to a sole

arbitrator to be appointed by TCFSL (hereinafter referred

to as “Arbitrator”) and the Arbitrator’

s award shall be fi

nal

and binding on both the Parties hereto. The Parti

es agree

to have their di

spute resolved by fast track procedure

specified in Section 29B of the Arbitration and Conci

li

ati

on

Act, 1996. The arbitration shall be held in Mumbai and and

the expenses of the arbitration shall be borne by the

Borrower. In the event of death, refusal, neglect, i

nabi

li

ty

or incapability of the person so appointed to act as an

Arbitrator, TCFSL shall appoint a new Arbitrator. The award

including interim award/s of the arbitration shall be fi

nal,

conclusive and binding on all parties concerned.”

3.

Today when the matter was called out, none have appeared

on behalf of the Respondent. By my order dated 16^th November, 2021, I

had adverted to the earlier orders passed by this Court as well as the

affidavit of service dated 24^th July, 2021. I was of the view that the

Laxmi 2/5

23 CARAP 19-21.doc

Respondent was keeping out of the way for the purpose of avoiding the

service. Accordingly, I had ordered that the Respondent be served by

substituted service as more particularly recorded in the said order.

4.

The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Applicant

has tendered an affidavit of service dated 3^rd December, 2021 evidencing

substituted service on the Respondent. Despite this, none have

appeared on his beha