M.K. NIMESH Vs. SUNDARAM FINANCE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original petition is filed to direct the Commercial Court, Ernakulam, to issue the certified copy of the order dtd. 24/11/2022 passed in CMA (Arb)No.611/2022 within a time frame.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that he had entered into a hypothecation agreement with the respondent for the purchase of a vehicle. The petitioner committed default and the respondent unilaterally appointed an Arbitrator, who has passed an interim award. It is learnt that the respondent has sought for enforcement of the interim award by filing CMA(Arb) No.611/2022 under Sec. 17(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1956 (in short 'Act') before the court below. Without notice to the petitioner, the court below has passed an order. Coming to learn of the order, the petitioner has filed an application to obtain the copy of order dtd. 24/11/2022. However, the respondent is proceeding to seize the vehicle with the assistance of an Advocate Commissioner. If the vehicle is seized, it would cause prejudice to the petitioner. The petitioner proposes to challenge the order. Hence, the original petition.

(3.) Heard; Sri.Shibu Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. In view of the limited relief that I propose to pass, I dispense with notice to the respondent.