IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR M.F.A. NO.4760 OF 2015 (AA) BETWEEN:
ASHRAF ALI, S/O MOHAMMED, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.NO.26, BILLAHALLI VILLAGE, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577213. …APPELLANT (BY SRI.V.N.JAGADEESH, ADVOCATE (ABSENT) ) AND:
1. M/S.SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD., NO.4, II FLOOR, MOOKAMBIKA COMPLEX, LADY DESIKA ROAD, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI – 004, REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER, SRI M.J.DEVARAJA, S/O JAVARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RECOVERY EXECUTIVE, M/S SHIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD., K.N.ROAD, CHIKKAMAGALURU – 577101.
2. DASTAGIR SAB, S/O SYED GAFAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.NO.28, BILLAHALLI VILLAGE, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577213. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.J.ALVA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 NOTICE SERVED ON R2) **** THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 37(1) (a) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.03.2015 PASSED ON ARBITRATION CASE NO.13/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, AT CHIKKAMAGALURU, ALLOWING PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 9 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant is absent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
3. It is submitted that the arbitration proceedings are concluded and the award has been passed by the arbitrator.
4. In the arbitration case the learned Principal District Judge has passed an order for attachment of property of respondent No.2 situated in Sy.No.12/3 of Billahalli village, Chikmagalur district.
5. As per the High Court of Karnataka Arbitration (Proceedings before the Courts) Rules, 2001, the arbitration proceedings shall have to be initiated within three months, from the date of order under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act failing which the interim order stands vacated automatically on expiry of the said period.
6. At this stage the counsel for the appellant has not made out any grounds to show that the impugned order is erroneous. It is pertinent to note that in para 8 of the appeal memo it is stated that the first respondent has initiated arbitration proceedings at Tamil Nadu and other proceedings at Chikmagalur.
7. Under these circumstances, there are no valid grounds to admit the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE ykl