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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5876

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANU, J
M/S. BKP CMMERCIAL INDIA PVT.LTD – Appellant
Versus
BHASKARAN – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.R.SHAJI
For the Respondents: SRI.H.VISHNUDAS

ORDER

Petitioner is a non banking financial company involved in advancing loans for various purposes. The respondents entered into Annexure P1 agreement dated 07.10.2022, when availed a personal loan of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Only) from the petitioner through its branch office, Kayamkulam. There was default in payment of loan. Invoking the arbitration clause in Annexure P1, the petitioner issued notice as contemplated under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 . Notices were returned as unclaimed. The respondents filed a suit as O.S.No.39 of 2025 before the Sub Court, Mavelikara with a prayer for settlement of accounts. Petitioner submits that already objection has been filed in the suit pointing out the arbitration clause in the agreement. 2. As there is no consensus regarding appointing the Arbitrator to resolve the disputes as provided under Annexure P1 agreement, this Arbitration Request has been filed.

Notice was issued and respondents 1 and 2 have entered appearance through counsel.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent pointed out pendency of

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