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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56191

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. NATARAJAN, J
ARUN O. – Appellant
Versus
MABEN NIDHI LTD. – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.M.A.JINSA MOL

JUDGMENT

(Dated: 5th December, 2025)

[OP(C) Nos.3076/2025, 3070/2025]

Both the petitions have been filed by the petitioner/judgment debtor, challenging the execution petition filed by the respondents/decree holder in E.P.Nos.415 of 2019 and 414 of 2019, pending on the files of the Additional District Court - II, Manjeri.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioners is that the respondents obtained the award in ACP Nos.123 of 2018 and 124 of 2018, for realisation of money, and thereafter filed Execution Petitions before the Additional District Court - II, Manjeri, for execution of the award. The petitioners, being the judgment debtors in both the cases filed these petitions, contending that the arbitration proceedings initiated by the decree holder before the Arbitrator, who was appointed unilaterally, which is illegal, and therefore, the execution cannot proceed against the petitioners. Hence prayed for declaring that the execution petitions are based on ex parte award passed by the Arbitrator, who was appointed unilaterally, which is illegal, null and void, and to be set aside.

4. The only contention

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