M.Maheshkumar vs M/S.Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 9160 Mad

                                                                                Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.320 of 2023

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                          DATED: 27.07.2023

                                                               CORAM

                                    THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                              Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.320 of 2023


                     1.M.Maheshkumar
                     2.Sujatha
                     3.United Traders,
                       rep. by its Partner Maheshkumar                                  ... Petitioners

                                                               Versus

                     M/s.Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd.,
                     rep. by its Legal Manager
                     C.Sangeetha                                                        ... Respondent

                     Prayer: Arbitration Original Petition (Commercial Division) filed under
                     Section 34(2)(ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside
                     the Award dated 13.03.2023 in Proceedings VIN/HLF/Arb. No.9 of 2023.
                                        For Petitioners      : Mr.N.R.Rajagopalan

                                        For Respondent       : Mr.M.Aravindan

                                                               ORDER

This petition has been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act challenging the impugned Arbitral Award dated 13.03.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.320 of 2023

on the ground that unilaterally, the respondent has appointed an Arbitrator,

which has culminated in passing of the impugned Arbitral Award.

2.This Court has perused and examined the Arbitral Award.

Admittedly, an Arbitrator has been unilaterally appointed by the respondent

as seen from the impugned Arbitral Award.

3.Learned counsel for the respondent also accepts the same.

4.It is settled law as laid down by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Perkins Eastman Architects DPC and another vs.

HSCC (India) Limited reported in (2020) 20 SCC 760 that a party to the

dispute cannot unilaterally appoint an Arbitrator.

5.In the instant case, since the respondent has unilaterally appointed

an Arbitrator, which has culminated in passing of the impugned Arbitral

Award, the impugned Arbitral Award is per se illegal in terms of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.320 of 2023

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Perkins case, referred to supra.

6.For the foregoing reasons, the impugned Arbitral Award is hereby

set aside and this petition is allowed as prayed for.

7.Liberty is granted to both the parties to initiate fresh Arbitration in

accordance with law. No costs.

27.07.2023 vga Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking orders

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.320 of 2023

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vga

Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.320 of 2023

27.07.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis