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

DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Diamond Entertainment Technologies Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Religare Finvest Limited – Respondent


JUDGMENT

ARB.P.62/2022

1. A Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed for appointment of the Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

2. It is submitted that a loan Agreement dated 10.01.2012 was executed between the petitioners and the respondents. They entered into a supplementary Agreement dated 27.01.2014 bearing Loan Account no. (s) XMORPNG00051190 having a Loan amount of Rs. 9,45,98,691/-. The instalments were to be paid till 15.02.2028 by the petitioner and according to the petitioner, an excess payment was made as it has made a payment of Rs. 11,33,07,673/- against the loan amount till June, 2021 which is in an overflow of Rs. 2,21,47,810/-. It is claimed that there was no default in the account in view of the overflow.

3. It has been explained that petitioner no. 1 and 2 are a Private Limited Company while the petitioner no. 3 is a limited Company. The petitioner no. 4 is the wife of petitioner no. 5 and a co-borrower and petitioner no. 5 is the Director of the Petitioner no. 1, 3 and 6. The petitioner no. 7 is the guarantor.

4. It is asserted that respondent is making demand of balance loan amount w

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