Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 3253
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANU, J
M/S. KLM AXIVA FINVEST LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
THOMAS C THOMAS – Respondent
AR NO. 258 OF 2025|AOP NO.50 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.G.RENJITH
A party must issue a fresh notice before initiating new arbitral proceedings after an arbitration award is set aside.
Headnote:The case examines the correctness of the order by the Commercial Court that set aside the prior arbitration award due to unilateral appointment of an Arbitrator. The Court emphasized the necessity of issuing a fresh notice before initiating new arbitral proceedings following the setting aside of an award. The request for arbitration was declared premature for this reason and closed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arbitration request premised on prior award. (Para 1) |
| 2. necessity for fresh notice in arbitration. (Para 2) |
| 3. request deemed premature. (Para 3) |
O R D E R
Petitioner, a non banking financial institution, is seeking nomination of Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between it and the respondents. Earlier an arbitation award was passed. The award dated 04.03.2024 was set aside by the Commercial Court, Ernakulam in A.OP. No.50 of 2024 by order dated 17.06.2025. The award was set aside for the reason that the appointment of Arbitrator was unilateral. Left with no other option, the petitioner has approached this Court in this Arbitration Request for nominating an Arbitrator for conducting fresh Arbitral proceedings.
2. In M/s.Agro Indus Credits Limited v.
Mangalan [ 2026 (1) KLT 1 ] this Court has held that when an Arbitral award is set aside and any of the parties intend to initiate fresh arbitral proceedings, it is necessary to issue a fresh notice. In this case, the petitioner has approached this Court without issuing a fresh notice.
3. Hence the Arbitration Request is premature. It is accordingly closed.
However it will be open to the petitioner to issue fresh notice and to approach this Court again.
Sd/-
