Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. NATARAJAN, J
SAKTHI FINANCE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
UMESH K.U. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek directives for case number assignment for loan recovery. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. counsel argues for jurisdiction rights based on arbitration clauses. (Para 2 , 5) |
| 3. court examines jurisdictional conflicts in seeking interim measures. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court's conclusion on necessary compliance with prior judgments. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT
These original petitions have been filed by the petitioners for issuing a direction to the District Court, Ernakulam, to assign numbers to the petitions and to take them up for consideration for passing appropriate orders under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act” for short).
2.Heard the arguments for the learned counsel for the petitioners.
3.The petitioners are financiers, and the respondents are borrowers who have defaulted in repaying the loan. Therefore, the petitioners filed an application under Section 9 of the Act, seeking an interim order before the District Court, Ernakulam for taking over possession of the vehicle. However, the office of the District Court, Ernakulam, raised an objection regarding territorial jurisdiction and, on the said ground, returned the files to the petitioners.
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
