[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Calcutta High Court
Srei Equipment Finance Limited vs Sai Logistics And Anr on 31 March, 2026
ORDER OCD - 23
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
COMMERCIAL DIVISION
ORIGINAL SIDE
AP-COM/1001/2025
SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED
VS
SAI LOGISTICS AND ANR
BEFORE
HON'BLE JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH
Date: March 31, 2026.
Appearance:-
Mr. Swatarup Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Sariful Haque, Adv.
Mr. Subhankar Chakraborty, Adv.
Ms. Harshita Nath, Adv.
The Court:- The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an Arbitral
Tribunal comprising a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the
parties.
This Court vide order dated 3rd February, 2026 had directed substituted
service upon the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an
affidavit of service, wherein service through publication has been effected upon
the respondents. Despite the same, none appears on behalf of the respondents.
Affidavit of service is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.1
availed financial assistance from the petitioner to the tune of 2,60,00,000/-
under a Master Facility Agreement dated 01.07.2019 bearing agreement
No.183423. It is further submitted that on behalf of the respondent No. 1, the
respondent No. 2 executed a Corporate Guarantee Agreement dated
01.07.2019. Both these agreements are independent and yet form part of the
same transaction. It is submitted that the respondents committed defaults in
adhering to the payment schedule as agreed between the parties.
In view thereof, the petitioner vide letter dated 04.07.2022 terminated the
said Master Facility Agreement dated 01.07.2019 and recalled the entire
outstanding amount of Rs.45,99,71,803/- as on 04.07.2022. Despite receipt of
the said notice, the respondents failed to liquidate the outstanding amount.
It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
arbitration clauses being clause No.9.10 and clause No.9.11 are contained in
the Master Facility Agreement dated 01.07.2019. The petitioner issued a notice
under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on 11.07.2025.
Despite receipt of the said notice, the respondents failed to respond or liquidate
the loan taken from the petitioner.
In the aforesaid circumstance, the petitioner has sought appointment of
a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The disputes
between the parties arise out of the alleged default in repayment of the loan
amount. The notice invoking arbitration was issued on 11.07.2025. Prima
facie, it appears that disputes have arisen between the parties in terms of the
Master Facility Agreement dated 01.07.2019 which contains an arbitration
clause therein. The jurisdiction of this Court is also attracted in terms of the
said clauses as mentioned by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Thus, this
Court is satisfied that the present case is a fit case for reference to arbitration.
Accordingly, this Court appoints Mr. Raja Chatterjee (Retire member of
Higher Judiciary), (Mob. No. 9433154810), as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate
the disputes between the parties.
All questions relating to arbitrability of the dispute, admissibility of the
claims, limitation and other issues are kept open to be urged before the learned
sole Arbitrator.
The appointment of the learned sole Arbitrator shall be subject to
compliance with Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The learned sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fix the remuneration in
accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Act.
A copy of this order shall be communicated by the petitioner to the
learned sole Arbitrator for necessary action.
With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
(GAURANG KANTH, J.)
R. D. Barua
