VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co Ltd v. Jaydeep Deepak

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
24 June 2026
Bench
K.Kumaresh Babuauthor
Case no.
Arb Appln 193/2026

Judgment

O R D E R When the matter came up for hearing on 11.02.2026, this Court passed the following order: Page2 of 4 " This application has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, [for brevity 'the Act'] for appointment of a receiver to seize and deliver the vehicle from the respondent to the applicant, if necessary, with police protection and by breaking open the premises.

¶2Heard Mr.D.Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for applicant and carefully perused the materials available on record.

¶3The respondent availed financial facilities from the applicant and they entered into an agreement on 31.05.2024. The total agreement value is Rs.12,16,658/-, which is payable in 84 monthly instalments starting from 05.07.2024 ending with

05.06.2031. Since the respondent did not repay the amount, arbitration proceedings were initiated and an award was passedon 24.07.2025. As on 10.01.2026, sum of Rs.14,29,001.64 is due and payable.

¶4The specific case of the applicant is that till date, the award has not been challenged. The applicant is also not able to take possession of the vehicle. It is under these circumstances, the present application has been filed before this Court.

¶5Accordingly, Mr.Raghvendra Raghuwanshi, Area Receivables Manager, is appointed as the receiver and the receiver is permitted to seize the vehicle from the respondent or wherever it is found and by breaking open the premises, if required with police assistance.

¶6Notice to the respondent returnable by 27.02.2026. Private notice is also permitted. List this application on 27.02.2026." Page3 of 4

¶2Notice sent to the respondent is awaited. However, the affidavit of service has also been filed indicating that the notice sent to the respondent had been returned with an endorsement as refused, which amounts to effective service on the respondent. The name of the respondent has also been printed in the cause list. However, there is no appearance either in person or through counsel. He was called absent and set exparte.

¶3Learned counsel for applicant submitted that the award had already been passed on 26.12.2025.

¶4In view of the aforesaid submission, the order passed by this Court on

11.02.2026 is made absolute. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. 24-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Maya Page4 of 4

K.KUMARESH BABU, J. Maya Dated : 24-06-2026

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU M/s.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, Chola Crest, C54-55 & Super B – 4, Thiru-vi-ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032, Represented by its Authorised Signatory. ..Petitioner(s) Vs Jaydeep Deepak ..Respondent(s) Arbitration Application under Order XIV Rule 8 of Original Side Rules r/w Section 9 (1) (ii) (a) (b) (d) & (e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to appoint employee of the applicant viz., Mr.Raghvendra Raghuwanshi, Area Receivables Manager, as Receiver to seize and take possession of the vehicle which is more fully described in the schedule to the Judges Summons which is lying in the custody of respondent or respondent's men, agents, servants from respondent premises or wherever found with police and break open of premises, if necessary. For Applicant : Mr.D.Pradeep Kumar For Respondent : No appearance

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.