Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The further case of the petitioner is that the respondents defaulted in repayment of the loan and committed breach of terms and conditions. In view of the same, a notice dated 13.09.2024 was issued by the petitioner demanding for the outstanding dues and for referring the dispute for arbitration. Subsequently, the sole arbitrator was also appointed to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The petitioner filed their statement of claim and application under Section 17 of the Act, for repossession of the hypothecated assets before the learned Arbitrator and the learned Arbitrator passed an interim order permitting the petitioner to repossess the hypothecated vehicles in respect of all the five contracts. Pursuant to this interim order, the petitioner also repossessed one vehicle. The respondents entered appearance before the learned Arbitrator with a direction to release the repossessed vehicle.

5. The respondents also filed a suit in OS No.6533 of 2024 before the VIII Assistant, City Civil Court, Chennai, praying for a permanent injunction restraining the petitioner from repossessing https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/10/2025 11:33:36 am ) Arb O.P(COM.DIV.) No. 597 of 2025 the remaining vehicles from the respondents. The petitioner filed a petition under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, stating that Arbitration proceedings were initiated and the same is pending. The suit came to be dismissed on 05.04.2025.

6. After the disposal of the suit, the petitioner repossessed the remaining vehicles and thus, all the five vehicles under the five contracts were repossessed by the petitioner.

7. During the pendency of the arbitration proceedings, the respondents filed a petition under Section 14(2) of the Act for termination of the mandate before this Court in Arb OP (Comm.Div) No.317 of 2025. This petition came to be allowed by this Court by an order dated 05.08.2025 by terminating the mandate of the Arbitrator and liberty was granted to the petitioner to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings against the respondents.

5. Learned counsel for appellants submits that pursuant to the order of AT, the vehicles have been repossessed and the appellants are under imminent threat of the same being put to sale by the respondents. We make it clear that we are not expressing any view or opinion either on the repossession or the threat of sale as that will be left to be decided either by the Section 9 Court or by the AT in a Section 17 legal drill.