The Branch Manager of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited is a signatory to Annexure-A1 loan agreement as reflected by the schedule thereof. The authorised signatory of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited has in addition signed on the other pages of Annexure-A1 loan agreement. Annexure-A5 notice demanding arbitration by Mr.T.P.Akbar was served on the Regional Office of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited as well as its Branch Manager at Manjeri. Annexure-A notice has been acknowledged by the addressee on 7.4.2014 and the Arbitration Request was filed only on 3.7.2014. 2. M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited has allegedly appointed Mr.S.Santhanakrishnan, Retired District Judge as the Arbitrator only thereafter on 16.7.2014. The right of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited to so appoint an arbitrator is lost after the Arbitration Request is filed on 3.7.2014. The law in this regard is well laid down in Datar Switchgears Ltd. v. Tata Finance Ltd. & Another [2000 (8) SCC 151] and Deep Trading Company v. Indian Oil Corporation & Ors. [(2013) 4 SCC 35] and is followed in Coastal Engineering v. Southern Railway [2014 (3) KLT 447].
3. Even otherwise the power of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited to appoint an arbitrator has been exhausted by appointing Mr.S.Mahesh, Advocate as Arbitrator earlier. The fact remains that the said Arbitrator did not enter into arbitration and pass an Award since the vehicle under hypothecation was since seized by M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited. Whether the vehicle (Hydraulic Mobile Crane) has been repossessed or voluntarily surrendered by Mr.T.P.Akbar is a disputed question to be resolved in Arbitration.
4. Sufficient opportunity was granted to M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited to file objection to the Arbitration Request which was not done. The authority of the Branch Manager and the Regional Office to receive the notice demanding arbitration was not disputed. The contention that all notices should be addressed to the registered office at Chennai does not impress me since the transaction was admittedly in the Manjeri office of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited. The notice issued to the Branch Manager and the Regional Office of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited shall therefore be deemed to be sufficient notice in the circumstances. I also note that the registered office of M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited at Chennai has not come forward to apply for any review of the judgment. There is no error apparent on the face of the record.
The Review Petition is accordingly dismissed.
nj.
Sd/-
V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.