Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 3093
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANU, J
POORAM FINSERV – Appellant
Versus
SANTHOSHKUMAR – Respondent
ARBITRATION REQUEST NO. 194 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.ANUPAMA SUBRAMANIAN
For the Respondents: SRI.M.J.POLLY
An arbitration request is premature if the petitioner fails to issue a fresh notice after a prior award is deemed unenforceable.
Headnote:In this arbitration request, the Court examined the need for fresh arbitration proceedings following the annulment of a prior award. The petitioner sought an arbitrator's appointment under an agreement containing an arbitration clause. The previous award was deemed unenforceable by the Execution Court (Refer to M/s.Agro Indus Credits Limited v. Mangalan, 2026 (1) KLT 1). The court determined the request was premature as no new notice had been provided after the annulment.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
- The petitioner initially sought appointment of an arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from an agreement containing an arbitration clause (!) .
- The previous arbitration award was declared unenforceable by the court, and the appointment of the arbitrator was found to be illegal, leading to the dismissal of the enforcement proceedings (!) .
- The court emphasized that when an arbitration award is set aside or declared unenforceable, a fresh notice must be issued before initiating new arbitration proceedings (!) .
- In this case, the petitioner did not issue a new notice after the court's order declaring the award unenforceable, rendering the arbitration request premature (!) .
- The court accordingly dismissed the arbitration request on the grounds that it was premature due to the absence of a fresh notice (!) .
- The court clarified that the petitioner is free to issue a new notice and approach the court again if desired (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks an arbitrator for disputes arising from an agreement. (Para 1) |
| 2. previous award deemed unenforceable; new notice required for arbitration. (Para 2) |
| 3. petitioner may issue fresh notice to approach the court. (Para 3) |
ORDER
The petitioner is seeking appointment of an arbitrator to decide the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents arising out of Annexure A agreement. The agreement contains an arbitration clause. Earlier arbitration proceedings were initiated. A sole arbitrator was nominated. The arbitrator passed Annexure B award on 08.12.2018. The award was sought to be executed in E.P.No.416 of 2019. By Annexure C order dated 07.11.2023, the Execution Court held that the appointment of the arbitrator was illegal, being unilateral. The Execution Court concluded that the award was unenforceable and the Execution Petition was dismissed. Thereafter this arbitration request was filed.
2. In M/s.Agro Indus Credits Limited v. Mangalan [2026 (1)
KLT 1] this Court held that when an arbitration award is set aside, it is necessary to issue fresh notice to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings. It is noticed that in this case, no notice was issued by the petitioner after Annexure C order was passed by the Execution Court holding that the award was unenforceable. Therefore, this arbitration request is premature and it is accordingly closed.
3. However, it is clarified that the petitioner is at liberty to issue a fresh notice and to approach this Court, if necessary.
Sd/-
