Facts
Tata Capital Limited applied under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of its employee as Party Receiver to repossess a Ford Figo Aspire hypothecated by borrower Noushad Areekan.
Source reference: p.1The Court recorded that the loan agreement, dated 25 November 2022, contained an arbitration clause; the lender claimed ₹1,94,615 was due and alleged the borrower was not clearing the dues or permitting peaceful repossession.
Source reference: pp.2–3Despite service of private notice, the respondent did not appear.
Source reference: p.3Issues
Whether, in the circumstances presented, a Party Receiver should be appointed under Section 9 to repossess the hypothecated vehicle.
Source reference: pp.1, 3Whether the Receiver could be authorised to seek police assistance and, where necessary, open locked premises or arrange access to the vehicle for repossession.
Source reference: pp.4–5Law Applied
The Court acted under Section 9(1)(ii)(b), (d) and (e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which empowers a court to grant interim measures, including securing the amount in dispute, appointing a receiver, and granting other measures it considers just and convenient.
Source reference: p.1The application also invoked Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules. The order cites no precedent.
Source reference: p.1Reasoning
The Court recorded the loan agreement’s arbitration clause, the claimed default and the lender’s apprehension that the vehicle could not be repossessed peacefully; it considered that apprehension reasonable.
Source reference: pp.2–3In light of those circumstances and the respondent’s non-appearance, the Court found it just and necessary to appoint the lender’s employee as Party Receiver.
Source reference: p.3To facilitate repossession, it authorised the Receiver to seek police assistance if faced with resistance and to open locked premises or arrange towing or mechanical assistance where required.
Source reference: pp.4–5Holding
The Court appointed Mr. Pranoy as Party Receiver to repossess the identified vehicle, verify and document its particulars, and report on the repossession.
The order also provided for police assistance, access to locked premises, and an opportunity for the parties to settle.
Source reference: pp.4–5The application was disposed of on those terms, with the Receiver’s mandate continuing until further orders.
Source reference: p.6Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961
Original Court PDF
Tata Capital LtdvsNoushad Areekan
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
