1 2025:CGHC:32745 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ARBR No. 36 of 2024 IIFL Home Finance Limited, R/o MIDC Thane Industrial Area Wagley Estate Thane 400604 and Plot No 98 Udyog Vihar PH-IV, Gurgaon, Haryana 122015 ... Applicant versus 1. Mr. Navneet Gupta S/o Mr. Chander Gupta, R/o Flat No. 406, Grand Tower, Exotica Apartment Opp. T.V. Tower, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492001 2. Mr. Chander Gupta S/o Mr. Parmanand Gupta R/o Flat No. 406, Grand Tower, Exotica Apartment Opp. T.V. Tower, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492001 3. Mrs. Leena Gupta W/o Mr. Navneet Gupta, R/o Flat No. 406, Grand Tower, Exotica Apartment Opp. T.V. Tower, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492001 4. Rahul Trading Co., Through Its Proprietor/authorized Signatory / Managing Director. --- R/o Flat No. 406, Grand Tower, Exotica Apartment Opp. T.V. Tower, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492001 ... Respondent(s) PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.07.15 18:00:05 +0530 2 For Applicant : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Swayam Tehanguria, Advocate. For Respondents : None. Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14.07.2025 1. This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator. 2. The facts, in brief, as projected by the applicant are that the applicant is a non-banking finance company within the meaning of Indian Company Act, 1956 and having its registered office as mentioned in the title. The applicant company is engaged, interalia, in the business of lending and advancing of money as such is a bank within the meaning of sub-clause (I) of clause C read with clause D of Section 2 of SARFASSI ACT 2002. The respondents had approached the applicant during the period between 2018 to 2020 and requested for section of lands for the purpose of housing loan / mortgage loan land against property. The respondents herein agreed to be as borrowers and co-borrowers loans caveator and also agreed to be collectively liable for repayment of loans. Respondents herein also proposed to mortgage various property to secure loan beside executive documents. The respondents also executed various loans documents VIZ loan agreements, promissory notice letter of continuity etc, and agreement to adopt the terms and condition of land documents including timely repayment of monthly installment. The respondents filed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the land documents and failed to make repayment of loan amount as per the payment schedule and there by committed default within the terms of the loan documents. The loan amount mentioned above have been declared NPA on 04.10.2022. Due to continuous default and 3 non-payment of installment committed by the respondents herein and applicant was left with no other option above then to issue statutory notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI ACT vide notice dated 11.10.2022 where by another different standing amount against the above-mentioned land amount were demanded and respondents were requested to make payment within 60 days but the respondents once again failed to make payments. Since no payment was received by the applicant, the petitioner again issued notice under section 13(4) of the SARFAESI ACT vide notice dated 25.01.2023 where by the possession of the aforesaid mortgaged properties were taken over by the applicant and it was informed through the said notice that the said mortgaged property would be sold through occasion and in shortfall amount shall be recovered from respondents at their cost. The applicant had also sent a demand notice dated 08.07.2024 stating the grievance of the applicant but no heed was paid to it. Thereafter, the petitioner invoked arbitration clause which finds its place at clause 10.8 of the standards terms and conditions which are part of loan agreement vide letter dated 05.08.2024 to refer the matter to arbitration. After the Supreme Court judgment in the Perkins east men judgment the applicant finds it suitable to approach this Hon'ble Court for appointment of sole and independent arbitrator as the applicant company cannot by itself appoint an arbitrator hence, this petition 3. Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is entitled for settlement of dispute by way of arbitration. He further submits that there is agreement between parties which entitled to refer the matter to arbitration in case of a dispute. The respondent have failed to repay the loan which compels the applicant to refer the matter to arbitration. Hence, the present application. 4. Vide order dated 06.11.2024, this Court had directed for issuance of notice 4 to the respondents. The matter was thereafter listed on 13.01.2025, to serve the respondents by way of paper publication in daily newspaper i.e. “Dainik Bhaskar” largerly circulated over the area of Raipur District. On 04.03.2025, since it was found that in compliance of the Court’s order dated 13.01.2025, the applicant was permitted to serve notice through paper publication in daily newspapers i.e. “Dainik Bhaskar” largely circulated over the area of Raipur District, it was submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that pursuant to the order passed by this Court paper publication was made, but despite that the respondent has chosen not to appear. It was made clear that in case the respondent fails to appear on the said date, the Court would proceed with the matter on merits. Today, when the matter is being taken up, none appears nor is any representation made of behalf of the respondent. 5. Since an affidavit has been filed which is an application for taking paper publication on record, from perusal of the same, it is evident that paper publication has been made in “Dainik Bhaskar” having largely circulated over the area of Raipur District where the Office of the respondents is situated, it is presumed that service of notice is complete. Despite having being served, the respondents have not appeared nor is there any opposition to the arbitration request, this Court deems it appropriate to appoint any retired High Court Judge as Arbitrator. 6. A query was put to learned counsel appearing for the applicant as to who may be appointed as Arbitrator for resolving the dispute existing between the parties, Mr. Kesharwani submits that Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawal Kishore Agrawal, who is a retired Judge of this High Court may be appointed as Sole Arbitrator. 7. In view of the above facts situation of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to appoint Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawal Kishore Agrawal, a retired Judge of this High Court to act as the Sole Arbitrator to resolve the 5 dispute involved in this arbitration request between the parties. 8. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawal Kishore Agrawal in the proper address. 9. The remuneration of the Arbitrator shall be settled with the mutual consent of the parties. 10. The arbitration request petition, accordingly, stands allowed. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Preeti