Madrasdated High Court · 2025

Order

-These applications have been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, seeking for appointment of advocate commissioners to repossess the respective equipments more fully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons from the respondents or wherever available. 2. The respondents are defaulters in the repayment of the loan to the applicant. They availed loan for the purchase of equipments. The equipments hypothecated to the applicant are more fully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons in these applications. Under the respective loan agreements, the applicant is empowered to repossess the equipments from the respondents, in case they commit default in the repayment of the loan to the applicant. There exists an arbitration clause in the loan contracts, which are the subject matter of these applications. The applicant has expressed its willingness to go for arbitration in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025accordance with the arbitration clause contained in the respective agreements. 3. Since the applicant has been unable to repossess the equipments on their own, they have filed this application seeking for appointment of advocate commissioners by this Court to repossess the equipments from the respondents or wherever available. The details of the amounts due and payable by the respondents to the applicant are furnished below: Arb. Appln. No. of installments due Arrears of Installments (in Rs.) Total outstanding amount (in Rs.) 985 of 2025 6 7,14,734 22,80,016 979 of 2025 6 13,14,570 81,89,327 983 of 2025 4 2,02,068 8,20,397 980 of 2025 5 6,38,147 63,47,187 981 of 2025 4 14,46,828 1,52,45,702 978 of 2025 8 15,41,425 53,48,100 984 of 2025 5 1,19,575 2,86,171 977 of 2025 3 7,66,980 96,19,865 982 of 2025 7 3,55,459 4,02,001.4. The applicant has already recalled the loan from the respondents through their loan recall notices. As on date, the respondents are in arrears of payment of installments, which ranges from 3 to 8 installments. This Court after giving due consideration to the contents of the affidavit filed in support of these applications as well as the documents filed along with these applications, is of the considered view that a prima facie case has been made out by the applicant for the appointment of advocate commissioners by this Court to repossess the equipments from the respondents or wherever available. However, in order to strike a balance to enable the respondents to get back possession of the equipments once they are repossessed by the advocate commissioners, this Court deems it fit to put the respondents on terms by directing the respondents to pay the arrears of installments due as on date under the respective contracts within a period of three days from the date when the advocate commissioners repossess the equipments from the respondents or wherever available. 5. The details of the amounts due and payable by the respondents within a period of three days from the date of the respective communication from the Advocate Commissioners under each of the loan agreements to enable them to get back the equipments from the applicant after they are repossessed by the Advocate Commissioners are as follows: Arb. Appln. No. Arrears of Installments (in Rs.) 985 of 2025 7,14,734 979 of 2025 13,14,570 983 of 2025 2,02,068 980 of 2025 6,38,147 981 of 2025 14,46,828 978 of 2025 15,41,425 984 of 2025 1,19,575 977 of 2025 7,66,980 982 of 2025 3,55,459.6. Accordingly, the following directions are issued by this Court: a) Ms.Antara Balaji, Advocate having address at Ground Floor, No.48, Eldams Road, Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018 (Mob. No.98946 38605) is appointed as the advocate commissioner to re-posses the equipments morefully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons from the respondents or from their premises or wherever available in Arb. Appln. Nos.985, 979 and 983 of 2025; https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025b) Mr.M. Vishnu, Advocate having address at Sicci, India Chamber Building (Main), No.6, 1st Floor, Esplanade, Chennai - 600 104 (Mob. No.97903 27629) is appointed as the advocate commissioner to re-posses the equipments morefully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons from the respondents or from their premises or wherever available in Arb. Appln. Nos.980, 981 and 978 of 2025 ; c) Ms.U. Ulaga Ilakkiya, Advocate having address at No.794, 59th Street, 10th Sector, K.K. Nagar, Chennai - 600 078 (Mob. No.79044 00362) is appointed as the advocate commissioner to re-posses the equipments morefully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons from the respondents or from their premises or wherever available in Arb. Appln. Nos.984, 977 and 982 of 2025; d) The advocate commissioners after re-possessing the respective equipments, shall handover interim custody of the same to the applicant, who shall keep it in their safe custody; e) The advocate commissioners, immediately after re-possessing the respective equipment, shall intimate the respondents either through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due (RPAD) or by hand delivery through a written communication, that they are in arrears of installments payable to the applicant; f) The respondents on payment of the respective arrears of installments as disclosed in paragraph No.5 of this order to the applicant within a period of three days from the date when the respective equipments were re-possessed, are entitled for return of the seized respective equipments, provided an undertaking is given by the respondents that the respondents shall pay the future installments on the due dates, without any default. On receipt of the arrears of installments within the stipulated time as stated supra, the applicant shall redeliver the respective equipments back to the respondents with proper acknowledgment and the advocate commissioners shall also render proper assistance for the same;g) The applicant shall initiate arbitration in accordance with the arbitration agreement contained in the respective contracts within a period of 90 days from today. In case, the applicant fails to initiate arbitration within the stipulated time, the order passed by this Court today shall stand automatically vacated and the re-possessed equipments shall also be redelivered back to the respondents by the applicant unconditionally; h) In case, the advocate commissioners require Police assistance due to any law and order problem or due to any obstruction caused by the respondents or by any third party, while re-possessing the respective equipments, the advocate commissioners are at liberty to seek police assistance from the concerned police station and the police department shall grant police protection accordingly. In case, break open of the premises, where the respective equipments are located, if required, the advocate commissioners shall break open the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025premises in the presence of the police and take an inventory and thereafter re-posses the respective equipments; i) Each of the advocate commissioners shall be paid an initial remuneration of Rs.50,000/-, which is payable by the applicant; the applicant shall pay the same before the execution of the warrant of commission; and on receipt of the same, the advocate commissioners shall proceed to execute this order. All the boarding, lodging and travelling expenses for the advocate commissioners shall be borne by the applicant. Notice to the respondents, returnable by 25.08.2025. Private Notice is also permitted. 3.Pursuant to the above order, the notice was served on the respondents and they have entered appearance through counsel and they have filed a common counter affidavit in these applications.4.As can be seen from the above order, three Advocate Commissioners were appointed in this case and each Advocate Commissioner has filed an independent report along with relevant documents and photographs. On a careful perusal of the report filed by the Advocate Commissioners, it is seen that they were able to seize a total of 19 machineries from various locations. All the three Advocate Commissioners in Unison stated that they were able to identify only 19 machineries and whatever was identified was seized and handed over to the applicant.5.The respondents in the counter affidavit have taken a stand that the Advocate Commissioners visited the premises of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025respondents and seized a total of 41 machineries from the premises on 14.08.2025. The respondents have also taken a stand that if at all the amounts due and payable to the applicant has to be repaid, they must be permitted to carry on with the operations and by seizing all the machineries, the entire operation of the respondent will come to a grinding halt and that will not in any way enure in favour of any of the parties.6.The learned counsel for respondent also submitted that if the machineries that were seized by the Advocate Commissioners are returned back, the respondent will give an undertaking that they will not alienate or encumber the machineries and they will proceed further with the operations and in the meantime, the arbitrator can be appointed by this Court for resolving the dispute between the parties.7.The above request made by the learned counsel for respondent was vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for applicant on the ground that totally 42 machineries formed part of the hypothecation agreement and whereas, what was actually available was only 19 machineries which were seized by the Advocate https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025Commissioners and these machineries were available at different locations. Therefore, it was contended that the conduct of the respondents is highly questionable and if the machineries are returned back to the respondents, they will certainly secret those machineries and the applicant will be put to irreparable loss and hardship.8.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also perused the materials available on record.9.The respondents had availed loan for purchase of equipments and those equipments have been hypothecated to the applicant. Thus, till the entire loan amount is settled by the respondents, legally speaking, the applicant will continue to be the owner of those equipments. It is alleged that the respondents became chronic defaulter and as a result, the loan was recalled and the application was filed before this Court under Section 9 of the Act for seizure of the machineries from the respondents. Even when the interim order was passed by this Court on 21.07.2025, this Court had taken into consideration the entire materials and thereafter, appointed Advocate Commissioners for the seizure of the machineries https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025which was directed to be handed over to the applicant.10.The respondents have taken a stand in the counter affidavit as if totally 41 machineries were seized from the premises. However, the reports submitted by the three Advocate Commissioners makes it clear that they were able to seize only 19 machineries in all and that too from different locations. These Advocate Commissioners are the officers of the Court and this Court will prefer to place reliance upon the reports submitted by the Advocate Commissioners rather than believing the stand taken by the respondents. The fact that only 19 machineries were available and they were seized and handed over to the applicant and the fact that there is absolutely no clarity as to where the remaining machineries are and considering the fact that there is huge outstanding from the respondents to the tune of nearly 4.85 Crores, this Court is not inclined to hand over the machineries to the respondents. Therefore, the request made by the respondents for returning back the machineries that were seized by the Advocate Commissioners is hereby rejected.11.Clause 11.4 / 13.5 in the loan cum hypothecation https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025agreements provides for Arbitration and Jurisdiction. As per the said clause, the appointment of the arbitrator has been left to the discretion of the lender. In other words, the agreement contemplates unilateral appointment of an arbitrator. Such a clause becomes in operative by virtue of the judgement of the Constitution Bench in 2025 4 SCC 641. Even though there are nine separate loan cum hypothecation agreement between the parties, the dispute is arising between the same parties. Hence, the dispute can be consolidated and it can be heard by a single arbitrator.12.On consent given by either side, this Court is inclined to appoint an arbitrator to enter reference and to adjudicate the claims arising out of the loan and hypothecation agreements which are the subject matter in all these applications. 13.In the light of the above discussion, this Court is inclined to appoint Mr. Niranjan Rajagopalan, Advocate, with address for service at New IIIA, High Court Chambers, Madras High Court, Chennai 600 104, Mobile No.9381803616, (e-mail [email protected]) as the sole Arbitrator and the Hon'ble https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025sole Arbitrator is requested to enter upon reference qua MGTA dated 05.09.2022, MRA dated 12.09.2023 and MLA dated 11.06.2024, adjudicate the arbitral disputes that had arisen between the parties and render arbitral award by holding sittings in the 'Madras High Court Arbitration Centre under the aegis of this Court' (MHCAC) as per Madras High Court Arbitration Proceedings Rules 2017 and fee of Hon'ble sole Arbitrator shall be in accordance with the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Administrative Cost and Arbitrator's Fees) Rules 2017 and fee of Hon'ble sole Arbitrator shall be in accordance with the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Administrative Cost and Arbitrator's Fees) Rules 2017. There shall be a direction to the applicants to pay the additional remuneration of Rs.15,000/- to each of the Advocate Commissioners.14. All these applications are disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.09-09-2025rkaIndex:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025 To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt LtdNo3/534, Kuruman Thottam, Senthampalayam Road, Kunnathur Village, coimbatore 641 107.2.AnisaNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, Srp Mill Shop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, Srp Mill Shop, Saravanampatti,s CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 984 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 982 of 2025To https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 20251.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Rod, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti,s CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 981 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Anisa WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 985 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 978 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP mill rod, Saravavampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP mill rod, Saravavampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 979 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.ANSIANo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravavampatti, Coimbatore https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025Arb Appln No. 980 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Anisa WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti,s CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 983 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025N.ANAND VENKATESH J.rka Arb Appln No. 977,984,982 , 981, 985, 978, 979, 980, 983 OF 2025andA NO. 3949 OF 2025,A NO. 3947 OF 2025, A NO. 3948 OF 2025, ARB APPLN NO. 983 OF 2025 09-09-2025

Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025accordance with the arbitration clause contained in the respective agreements. 3. Since the applicant has been unable to repossess the equipments on their own, they have filed this application seeking for appointment of advocate commissioners by this Court to repossess the equipments from the respondents or wherever available. The details of the amounts due and payable by the respondents to the applicant are furnished below: Arb. Appln. No. of installments due Arrears of Installments (in Rs.) Total outstanding amount (in Rs.) 985 of 2025 6 7,14,734 22,80,016 979 of 2025 6 13,14,570 81,89,327 983 of 2025 4 2,02,068 8,20,397 980 of 2025 5 6,38,147 63,47,187 981 of 2025 4 14,46,828 1,52,45,702 978 of 2025 8 15,41,425 53,48,100 984 of 2025 5 1,19,575 2,86,171 977 of 2025 3 7,66,980 96,19,865 982 of 2025 7 3,55,459 4,02,001.4. The applicant has already recalled the loan from the respondents through their loan recall notices. As on date, the respondents are in arrears of payment of installments, which ranges from 3 to 8 installments. This Court after giving due consideration to the contents of the affidavit filed in support of these applications as well as the documents filed along with these applications, is of the considered view that a prima facie case has been made out by the applicant for the appointment of advocate commissioners by this Court to repossess the equipments from the respondents or wherever available. However, in order to strike a balance to enable the respondents to get back possession of the equipments once they are repossessed by the advocate commissioners, this Court deems it fit to put the respondents on terms by directing the respondents to pay the arrears of installments due as on date under the respective contracts within a period of three days from the date when the advocate commissioners repossess the equipments from the respondents or wherever available. 5. The details of the amounts due and payable by the respondents within a period of three days from the date of the respective communication from the Advocate Commissioners under each of the loan agreements to enable them to get back the equipments from the applicant after they are repossessed by the Advocate Commissioners are as follows: Arb. Appln. No. Arrears of Installments (in Rs.) 985 of 2025 7,14,734 979 of 2025 13,14,570 983 of 2025 2,02,068 980 of 2025 6,38,147 981 of 2025 14,46,828 978 of 2025 15,41,425 984 of 2025 1,19,575 977 of 2025 7,66,980 982 of 2025 3,55,459.6. Accordingly, the following directions are issued by this Court: a) Ms.Antara Balaji, Advocate having address at Ground Floor, No.48, Eldams Road, Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018 (Mob. No.98946 38605) is appointed as the advocate commissioner to re-posses the equipments morefully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons from the respondents or from their premises or wherever available in Arb. Appln. Nos.985, 979 and 983 of 2025; https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025b) Mr.M. Vishnu, Advocate having address at Sicci, India Chamber Building (Main), No.6, 1st Floor, Esplanade, Chennai - 600 104 (Mob. No.97903 27629) is appointed as the advocate commissioner to re-posses the equipments morefully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons from the respondents or from their premises or wherever available in Arb. Appln. Nos.980, 981 and 978 of 2025 ; c) Ms.U. Ulaga Ilakkiya, Advocate having address at No.794, 59th Street, 10th Sector, K.K. Nagar, Chennai - 600 078 (Mob. No.79044 00362) is appointed as the advocate commissioner to re-posses the equipments morefully described in the respective schedule to the respective Judges Summons from the respondents or from their premises or wherever available in Arb. Appln. Nos.984, 977 and 982 of 2025; d) The advocate commissioners after re-possessing the respective equipments, shall handover interim custody of the same to the applicant, who shall keep it in their safe custody; e) The advocate commissioners, immediately after re-possessing the respective equipment, shall intimate the respondents either through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due (RPAD) or by hand delivery through a written communication, that they are in arrears of installments payable to the applicant; f) The respondents on payment of the respective arrears of installments as disclosed in paragraph No.5 of this order to the applicant within a period of three days from the date when the respective equipments were re-possessed, are entitled for return of the seized respective equipments, provided an undertaking is given by the respondents that the respondents shall pay the future installments on the due dates, without any default. On receipt of the arrears of installments within the stipulated time as stated supra, the applicant shall redeliver the respective equipments back to the respondents with proper acknowledgment and the advocate commissioners shall also render proper assistance for the same;g) The applicant shall initiate arbitration in accordance with the arbitration agreement contained in the respective contracts within a period of 90 days from today. In case, the applicant fails to initiate arbitration within the stipulated time, the order passed by this Court today shall stand automatically vacated and the re-possessed equipments shall also be redelivered back to the respondents by the applicant unconditionally; h) In case, the advocate commissioners require Police assistance due to any law and order problem or due to any obstruction caused by the respondents or by any third party, while re-possessing the respective equipments, the advocate commissioners are at liberty to seek police assistance from the concerned police station and the police department shall grant police protection accordingly. In case, break open of the premises, where the respective equipments are located, if required, the advocate commissioners shall break open the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025premises in the presence of the police and take an inventory and thereafter re-posses the respective equipments; i) Each of the advocate commissioners shall be paid an initial remuneration of Rs.50,000/-, which is payable by the applicant; the applicant shall pay the same before the execution of the warrant of commission; and on receipt of the same, the advocate commissioners shall proceed to execute this order. All the boarding, lodging and travelling expenses for the advocate commissioners shall be borne by the applicant. Notice to the respondents, returnable by 25.08.2025. Private Notice is also permitted. 3.Pursuant to the above order, the notice was served on the respondents and they have entered appearance through counsel and they have filed a common counter affidavit in these applications.4.As can be seen from the above order, three Advocate Commissioners were appointed in this case and each Advocate Commissioner has filed an independent report along with relevant documents and photographs. On a careful perusal of the report filed by the Advocate Commissioners, it is seen that they were able to seize a total of 19 machineries from various locations. All the three Advocate Commissioners in Unison stated that they were able to identify only 19 machineries and whatever was identified was seized and handed over to the applicant.5.The respondents in the counter affidavit have taken a stand that the Advocate Commissioners visited the premises of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025respondents and seized a total of 41 machineries from the premises on 14.08.2025. The respondents have also taken a stand that if at all the amounts due and payable to the applicant has to be repaid, they must be permitted to carry on with the operations and by seizing all the machineries, the entire operation of the respondent will come to a grinding halt and that will not in any way enure in favour of any of the parties.6.The learned counsel for respondent also submitted that if the machineries that were seized by the Advocate Commissioners are returned back, the respondent will give an undertaking that they will not alienate or encumber the machineries and they will proceed further with the operations and in the meantime, the arbitrator can be appointed by this Court for resolving the dispute between the parties.7.The above request made by the learned counsel for respondent was vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for applicant on the ground that totally 42 machineries formed part of the hypothecation agreement and whereas, what was actually available was only 19 machineries which were seized by the Advocate https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025Commissioners and these machineries were available at different locations. Therefore, it was contended that the conduct of the respondents is highly questionable and if the machineries are returned back to the respondents, they will certainly secret those machineries and the applicant will be put to irreparable loss and hardship.8.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also perused the materials available on record.9.The respondents had availed loan for purchase of equipments and those equipments have been hypothecated to the applicant. Thus, till the entire loan amount is settled by the respondents, legally speaking, the applicant will continue to be the owner of those equipments. It is alleged that the respondents became chronic defaulter and as a result, the loan was recalled and the application was filed before this Court under Section 9 of the Act for seizure of the machineries from the respondents. Even when the interim order was passed by this Court on 21.07.2025, this Court had taken into consideration the entire materials and thereafter, appointed Advocate Commissioners for the seizure of the machineries https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025which was directed to be handed over to the applicant.10.The respondents have taken a stand in the counter affidavit as if totally 41 machineries were seized from the premises. However, the reports submitted by the three Advocate Commissioners makes it clear that they were able to seize only 19 machineries in all and that too from different locations. These Advocate Commissioners are the officers of the Court and this Court will prefer to place reliance upon the reports submitted by the Advocate Commissioners rather than believing the stand taken by the respondents. The fact that only 19 machineries were available and they were seized and handed over to the applicant and the fact that there is absolutely no clarity as to where the remaining machineries are and considering the fact that there is huge outstanding from the respondents to the tune of nearly 4.85 Crores, this Court is not inclined to hand over the machineries to the respondents. Therefore, the request made by the respondents for returning back the machineries that were seized by the Advocate Commissioners is hereby rejected.11.Clause 11.4 / 13.5 in the loan cum hypothecation https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025agreements provides for Arbitration and Jurisdiction. As per the said clause, the appointment of the arbitrator has been left to the discretion of the lender. In other words, the agreement contemplates unilateral appointment of an arbitrator. Such a clause becomes in operative by virtue of the judgement of the Constitution Bench in 2025 4 SCC 641. Even though there are nine separate loan cum hypothecation agreement between the parties, the dispute is arising between the same parties. Hence, the dispute can be consolidated and it can be heard by a single arbitrator.12.On consent given by either side, this Court is inclined to appoint an arbitrator to enter reference and to adjudicate the claims arising out of the loan and hypothecation agreements which are the subject matter in all these applications. 13.In the light of the above discussion, this Court is inclined to appoint Mr. Niranjan Rajagopalan, Advocate, with address for service at New IIIA, High Court Chambers, Madras High Court, Chennai 600 104, Mobile No.9381803616, (e-mail [email protected]) as the sole Arbitrator and the Hon'ble https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025sole Arbitrator is requested to enter upon reference qua MGTA dated 05.09.2022, MRA dated 12.09.2023 and MLA dated 11.06.2024, adjudicate the arbitral disputes that had arisen between the parties and render arbitral award by holding sittings in the 'Madras High Court Arbitration Centre under the aegis of this Court' (MHCAC) as per Madras High Court Arbitration Proceedings Rules 2017 and fee of Hon'ble sole Arbitrator shall be in accordance with the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Administrative Cost and Arbitrator's Fees) Rules 2017 and fee of Hon'ble sole Arbitrator shall be in accordance with the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Administrative Cost and Arbitrator's Fees) Rules 2017. There shall be a direction to the applicants to pay the additional remuneration of Rs.15,000/- to each of the Advocate Commissioners.14. All these applications are disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.09-09-2025rkaIndex:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025 To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt LtdNo3/534, Kuruman Thottam, Senthampalayam Road, Kunnathur Village, coimbatore 641 107.2.AnisaNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, Srp Mill Shop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, Srp Mill Shop, Saravanampatti,s CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 984 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 982 of 2025To https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 20251.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Rod, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti,s CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 981 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Anisa WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Shop, Saravanampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 985 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 978 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP mill rod, Saravavampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP mill rod, Saravavampatti, CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 979 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.ANSIANo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhapuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravavampatti, Coimbatore https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025Arb Appln No. 980 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Anisa WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP mill Stop, Saravanampatti,s CoimbatoreArb Appln No. 983 of 2025To1.Infant Jesus Engineering Works Pvt Ltd2.Ansia WNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore3.Sathish SNo 19, Sivanandhampuram, SRP Mill Stop, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb Appln No. 977 of 2025N.ANAND VENKATESH J.rka Arb Appln No. 977,984,982 , 981, 985, 978, 979, 980, 983 OF 2025andA NO. 3949 OF 2025,A NO. 3947 OF 2025, A NO. 3948 OF 2025, ARB APPLN NO. 983 OF 2025 09-09-2025