Cholamandalam Investment And Finance ... vs Heena Enterprise And Anr
2026 Latest Caselaw 2806 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance ... vs Heena Enterprise And Anr on 8 April, 2026

    ORDER                                                                    OCD - 24
                            IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                                COMMERCIAL DIVISION
                                    ORIGINAL SIDE

                       AP-COM/210/2026
     CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED
                             VS
                  HEENA ENTERPRISE AND ANR

BEFORE
HON'BLE JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH
Date: April 08, 2026.
                                                                                   Appearance:-
                                                                      Ms. Shrayashee Das, Adv.
                                                                    Mr. Tridibesh Dasgupta, Adv.
                                                                      Ms. Anukriti Agarwal, Adv.
                                                                                  ...for petitioner.


     The Court:- Affidavit of service is taken on record. Despite service, none

appears for the respondents.

The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 9 of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a receiver to

take possession of the asset being JCB COMPACTOR bearing Registration No.

NON11609315, pending resolution of dispute between the parties.

It is a case of the petitioner that credit facility amounting to

Rs.25,50,000/- was extended to the respondents for purchase of the said

vehicle. In terms of the loan agreement dated 2 nd January, 2024, the

respondents were required to repay the loan in 59 equated monthly

instalments commencing from 10th February, 2024 and ending on 10th

December, 2028. The respondents committed default from the 15 th instalment.

The petitioner by a letter dated 19.02.2026 terminated the loan agreement

and raised the demand of Rs.22,88,859/-. Despite such termination, the

respondents have failed and neglected to liquidate the outstanding dues

compelling the petitioner to seek interim protection by way of appointment of a

receiver to secure the asset.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in terms of clause 29 of the

loan agreement, the disputes between the parties are referable to arbitration

with the seat of arbitration being Calcutta. It is further submitted that this

Court has necessary territorial jurisdiction in terms of the contract to entertain

the present petition.

Upon considering the pleadings and materials placed on record, it prima

facie appears that the respondents have committed default in payment of the

loan instalment resulting in lawful termination of the agreement. The

petitioner being a secured creditor, has the subsisting contractual and

proprietary right in the hypothecated vehicle. The balance of convenience

clearly tilts in favour of the petitioner. If the interim order is not granted, there

exists a real and imminent possibility of the vehicle being concealed, alienated

or otherwise dealt with by the respondents thereby frustrating the petitioner's

claim and rendering the arbitral proceedings infructuous. The petitioner will

suffer irreparable loss and injury in the event the interim relief is not granted

as the vehicle constitutes the primary security for the loan transaction and its

continued possession with the defaulting borrower would seriously prejudice

the petitioner's rights which cannot be adequately compensated by monetary

damage at a later stage.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and having regard to the

existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience and the likelihood

irreparable injury, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has

made out a fit case for grant of interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration

and Conciliation Act, 1996.

In view of such, this Court considers granting of the interim injunction in

favour of the petitioner. Ms. Susmita Biswas Chowdhury (Mobile No: -

9433905254/9432665226) is appointed as a receiver for the purpose of taking

possession of the attached vehicle JCB COMPACTOR bearing Registration No.

NON11609315. The receiver shall be entitled to remuneration Rs. 35,000/- in

addition to the actual out of pocket expense which shall be borne by the

petitioner. The petitioner is directed to depute competent person to assist the

receiver in locating, identifying and taking possession of the vehicle.

The Officer-in-charge of the concerned police station shall render all

necessary assistance to the receiver as and when required for effective

implementation of this order.

Let this matter be listed after six weeks for receiver's report and further

consideration.

The petitioner is directed to take adequate steps for constitution of the

arbitral tribunal before the next date.

(GAURANG KANTH, J.)

R. D. Barua