Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. NATARAJAN, J
NEELIMA E, SAJEESH NAIR – Appellant
Versus
M/S B COMPANY – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners challenge arbitration and execution orders. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. court's examination of parties' positions. (Para 2 , 6) |
| 3. arguments over unilateral appointment of arbitrator. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. legal principles from supreme court on arbitration. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court finds award non-est and sets aside all orders. (Para 10) |
-
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 19th day of August, 2025)
The Original petition is filed by the petitioners/judgment debtor under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , praying to set aside the Exhibit-P1 order dated 29.11.2023 in E.A.No..335/2023 in E.P.No.317/2022, set aside the Exhibit-P2 order dated 27.02.2025 in E.A.No.685/2024, the Exhibit-P3 order dated 27.02.2025 in E.A.No.686/2024, and the award passed by the sole arbitrator dated 18.09.2021, and pass any appropriate order.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.
3. The case of the petitioner is that, the respondent said to be initiated arbitration proceedings before the sole arbitrator one Mr.K.A Mariappan at Chennai alleging that the petitioner said to be borrowed loan by executing five documents from the respondent
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
