Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 2025:KER:25707 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947 ARB.A NO. 3 OF 2024 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 07.09.2023 IN AOP NO.259 OF 2022 OF DISTRICT COURT& SESSIONS COURT,PATHANAMTHITTA APPELLANTS:
M/S. SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED AGED 35 YEARS FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 123 ANGAPPA NAICKEN STREET, CHENNAI 600 001 AND A BRANCH INTERALIA AT 1ST FLOOR, NANTHIYATTU BUILDING COLLEGE JUNCTION, MAKKAMKUNNU PATHANAMTHITTA REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY JITHIN G., PIN - 689645 BY ADVS. C.HARIKUMAR SANDRA SUNNY ARUN KUMAR M.A FARAH JYOTHI PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: 1 SREELATHA S.
AGED 67 YEARS W/O. KRISHNAN NAIR NANDHANAM, PANNIYALI OMALLOOR VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689647 2 SHINERAJ AGED 47 YEARS
2 ARB.A NO. 3 OF 2024 2025:KER:25707 S/O. LATE SUKUMARAN NAIR THEKKETHOMAYIL, KODUMTHARA PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689645 BY ADVS. S.SHANAVAS KHAN S.INDU(K/002856/1999) KALA G.NAMBIAR(K/515/2006) THIS ARBITRATION APPEALS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3 ARB.A NO. 3 OF 2024 2025:KER:25707 SYAM KUMAR V.M., J. ------------------------------------------ Arb. A No. 3 of 2024 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of March, 2025 JUDGMENT This appeal is filed impugning the order dated 07.09.2023 in O.P. (Arb.) No. 259 of 2022 of the District Court, Pathanamthitta in a petition filed by the appellant invoking Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 2. The limited challenge put forth against the order impugned is that the same had been rendered on the erroneous premise that the appellant is a decree holder in an award which had been rendered by an arbitrator who had been unilaterally appointed. The District Court had in the impugned order placed reliance on the dictum laid down in Hedge Finance Pvt. Ltd. (M/s.) Ernakulam v. Bijish Joseph (2022 KHC 591). The said reliance, it is submitted is erroneous since the matter before the Court below was only a Section 9 petition, where in Annexure A1 interim order had already been granted by the District Court. The finding in the order impugned that an award had been rendered, and that same is hit by Section 12(5) and Section 7 of
4 ARB.A NO.
3 OF 2024 2025:KER:25707 the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is factually erroneous. No award had been rendered in the matter nor was any such award challenged. The impugned order, it is submitted had been rendered without a proper appreciation of facts and mechanically. It is hence sought to be set aside. 3. Heard Advocate Sri.C.Harikumar for the appellant as well as the Advocate Smt.S.Indu of R2. It is submitted that R2 is the son of R1 and that R1 is no more. 4. Having perused the order impugned and the records produced. I find merit in the submission that the order had been rendered without taking note of the fact that no award had been rendered or was under challenge before the court. The subject matter was a Section 9 petition. Dismissal of the Section 9 petition seeking interim measures holding that the “award” had been rendered in violation of the dictum in Hedge Finance Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is hence incorrect and unsustainable. In view of the above, the order impugned is fit to be set aside and the matter be remanded back for fresh consideration in accordance with the law. 5. Thus the order dated 07.09.2023 in O.P. (Arb.) No. 259 of 2022 of the District Court, Pathanamthitta is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the files of the said court for
5 ARB.A NO. 3 OF 2024 2025:KER:25707 fresh consideration. The interim order of attachment granted by this Court on 16.01.2024 shall continue until orders are passed afresh in O.P.(Arb.) No.259 of 2022 by the District Court, Pathanamthitta. The Arbitration appeal is allowed. Sd/- SYAM KUMAR V. M. JUDGE NJ
6 ARB.A NO. 3 OF 2024 2025:KER:25707 APPENDIX OF ARB.A 3/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO 1 OF 2022 IN O.P.(ARB.) NO 259 OF 2022 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA DATED 03.11.2022