IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CMPMO No. 553 of 2022 Decided on: 01.07.2025 ____________________________________________________ M/s Punjab Kashmir Finance Limited ……….. petitioner Versus Abhay Thakur and others ……….respondents ____________________________________________________ Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocates. For the respondents : Respondents proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 26.12.2022. ____________________________________________________ Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) The present petition has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 29.6.2022 passed by the learned District Judge, Solan (H.P.) in Execution Petition No. 457 of 2021 titled as M/s Punjab Kashmir Finance Limited vs. Abhay Thakur and others, whereby the aforesaid execution petition filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (herein after for purpose of brevity referred to as the Act) has been held to be void ab initio. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner. None for the respondents as they have proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 26.12.2022. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. The petitioner in the case at hand is non-banking finance company. It had extended a loan to respondent No.1. Respondents No. 2 to 5 had stood guarantors for the repayment of the loan and interest accrued thereupon. The loan agreement is dated 31.7.2019. The same alone gave the power to the present petitioner to appoint an Arbitrator. On a dispute having been accrued inter se the parties, an Arbitrator was appointed by the present petitioner and entered into a reference and pronounced an ex parte order dated 27.4.2021. 4. On 23.10.2015, Section 12(5) read with Seventh schedule were added to the Act. By virtue of the aforesaid amendments to the Act, the parliament introduced the doctrine of neutrality of arbitrators in the Act. Subsequent to the aforesaid incorporations in the Act, appointment of any person mentioned in the seventh schedule of the Act or any other person nominated by him for determination of disputes arising under the arbitration agreement is void ab initio, proceedings conducted by such an arbitrator are non-est and award passed, if any, is void. 4. Keeping in view the aforesaid and the fact that conspicuous by absence in the award of the learned arbitrator is an express agreement in writing of the present respondents after the accrual of the dispute which enabled the arbitrator to act as such despite the statutory provisions contained under Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Act. The unilateral 3 appointment of the arbitrator in the case at hand is void ab initio, proceedings conducted by the arbitrator in the case at hand are non-est and the award passed is void. 5. In the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances, the executing Court has correctly held that the unilateral appointment of the arbitrator where the present petitioner in the case at hand was void ab initio, hence, proceedings conducted by him are non-est and the award passed is void. 6. On account of the aforesaid, I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 29.6.2022, therefore, the present petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge July 01, 2025 tarun