Delhi District Court
Regional Office At vs Munna Tiwari on 20 December, 2017
IN THE COURT OF MS RAJ RANI MITTRA,
ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE-04 : SOUTH WEST
DISTRICT DWARKA COURTS : NEW DELHI.
ARBT No.4404/2017
L & T Finance Limited
Having its Registered Office at:
Technopolis, 7th Floor Wing A,
Plot no.4, Block BP, Sector-V,
Salt Lake, Kolkata-700091
Regional Office at:-
5th Floor, DCM Building
Cannaught Place,
NEW DELHI-110001 .........Petitioner
Versus
Munna Tiwari
S/o Ram Dhan Tiwari
H.no.180, Vill-Dharsauna,
PO-Cholapur, Tal-Pindra, Dist.
Chandauli
UTTAR PRADESH-221001 .....Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner has filed the present petition U/S 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 claiming that the respondent had approached the petitioner company seeking grant of loan for purchase of vehicle/Asset i.e. VEHICLE/ASSET/MACHINE:
SONALIKA DI-734, BEARING REGD NO.UP65-CB-5052, ENGINE NO.3100DL53E491457F3, CHASSIS NO.FZQSU495036SM. On the request of the respondent an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- was sanctioned vide agreement dated 02.09.2015. The respondent agreed to repay the loan amount in 12 Quarterly installments of Page : 1/3 Rs.38800X12 for a period of 36 months. Necessary documents in that regard were claimed to have been executed by the respondent. As per case of the petitioner, the petitioner had duly paid the financed amount to the respondent against the aforesaid vehicle/Asset and the said vehicle was under exclusive hypothecation of the petitioner. The respondent started defaulting in repayment for which a loan recall notice was sent to the respondent to recover the outstanding dues of Rs.3,34,477/-. It was further claimed that there existed an arbitration clause in the agreement entered into between the parties and the dispute was to be settled by arbitration. The petitioner had prayed for appointment of Receiver to take possession of the vehicle in question.
2. Vide order dated 14.11.2017 passed by this Court, Mr. Mohammad Saad Authorized Representative of the petitioner company was appointed as receiver to take the interim possession of the vehicle in question.
3. I have heard the Ld. counsel for the petitioner. Notice was issued to the respondent but the same has not been received back. Even vehicle could not be repossessed as per the statement of the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that he does not intend to continue with the present petition for the reason that arbitration proceedings have been initiated against the respondent. He further prays that interim order passed earlier may be made absolute i.e. till the final outcome of the arbitration proceedings and the petition may be disposed of.
4. Perusal of record reveals that as per Arbitration clause in the Loan Agreement entered into between the parties, all disputes, differences or claims arising out of the agreement shall be settled by Page : 2/3 arbitration in accordance with provisions of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. As per Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, a party can approach the Court either before or during the arbitration proceedings or at any time after making of the award for interim injunction or appointment of a Receiver. Since the arbitration proceedings have already been initiated in the case, the earlier order dated 14.11.2017 is made absolute, till the final outcome of the arbitration proceedings. However, in case the vehicle is repossessed, the receiver shall be duty bound to maintain the vehicle in same condition till appropriate order in that regard is passed by Ld. Arbitrator. The petitioner shall not sell, dismantle or create any encumbrance over the vehicle till further order of the court. The petitioner shall ensure that the vehicle is parked properly and safely. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court on 20.12.2017.
(RAJ RANI MITTRA) ADJ-04/SW/DWARKA NEW DELHI/20.12.2017 Page : 3/3