Bombay High Court Allows Appointment of Court Receiver in Arbitration Petition Under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for Loan Default. Loan Agreement Default Leads to Appointment of Receiver to Secure Claim Pending Arbitration.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 53
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, L & T Finance Limited, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a Court Receiver in respect of properties described in Exhibit F to the petition and an order directing the respondents to deposit Rs.6,94,70,392.29 or furnish security of like amount. The dispute arose from a facility agreement dated 31.8.2011 whereby the petitioner sanctioned a short term financing facility of Rs.10 Crores to respondent no.1 (Duplex Industries Ltd.) for purchase of goods from Sterlite Industries (I) Limited. Respondent no.2 (Anand Vishnu Satpute) executed a deed of guarantee. The respondent no.1 made payment of three installments but committed default in respect of remaining installments. The petitioner issued a demand-cum-termination notice dated 13.7.2012 terminating the agreement and demanding payment. The respondents did not dispute the loan or the default. The court considered the submissions and held that since the respondents did not dispute the loan or the amount claimed, the petitioner had a strong prima facie case. The court appointed the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay as Receiver of the properties described in Exhibit F with powers to take possession and manage the properties. The court also directed the respondents to deposit Rs.6,94,70,392.29 within four weeks or furnish security to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary and Senior Master. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Arbitration - Interim Measures - Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Appointment of Receiver - The petitioner sought appointment of Court Receiver and direction for deposit of Rs.6,94,70,392.29 or furnishing security due to default in loan repayment - Court held that since the respondents did not dispute the loan or default, and the petitioner had a strong prima facie case, appointment of Receiver was justified to protect the petitioner's interest pending arbitration (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment of Court Receiver and direction for deposit of amount or furnishing security under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Court appointed the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay as Receiver of the properties described in Exhibit F with powers to take possession and manage the properties. The respondents were directed to deposit Rs.6,94,70,392.29 within four weeks or furnish security to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary and Senior Master. The petition was disposed of.

Law Points

  • Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
  • 1996
  • Appointment of Receiver
  • Interim Measures
  • Security for Claim
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (BOM) (04) 72

Arbitration Petition No. 1282 of 2012

2013-04-01

R.D. Dhanuka, J.

Ms. S.I. Joshi i/b M/s S.I. Joshi & Co., for Petitioner; Mr. Carl Shroff a/w Ms. Mahek Bookwala i/b M/s Apte & Co., for the Respondents

L & T Finance Limited

Duplex Industries Ltd. & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Arbitration petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interim measures including appointment of Court Receiver and direction for deposit of amount or furnishing security.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought appointment of Court Receiver in respect of properties described in Exhibit F and order directing respondents to deposit Rs.6,94,70,392.29 or furnish security.

Filing Reason

Default in repayment of loan under facility agreement dated 31.8.2011.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment of Court Receiver under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Whether the respondents should be directed to deposit the claimed amount or furnish security.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner submitted that respondents did not dispute the loan or default, and thus interim protection was necessary. Respondents did not dispute the loan or the amount claimed.

Ratio Decidendi

Under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, where the loan and default are not disputed, the court may appoint a Receiver and direct deposit or security to protect the petitioner's interest pending arbitration.

Judgment Excerpts

By this petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner seeks an appointment of the Court Receiver in respect of the properties described in Exhibit 'F' to the petition and also seeking an order of deposit of Rs.6,94,70,392.29 by the respondent or in the alternative to furnish security of the like amount to secure the claim of the petitioner.

Procedural History

Petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Heard on 1.4.2013 and disposed of on same date.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 9
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appointment of Court Receiver in Arbitration Petition Under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for Loan Default. Loan Agreement Default Leads to Appointment of Receiver to Secure Claim Pending Arbitration.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Restoration of First Appeal Dismissed in Default, Emphasizes Liberal Construction of Procedural Law to Advance Substantial Justice. The Court held that an order refusing to readmit an appeal under Order 41 Rule 19 CPC is appealab...