Madras High Court
CRP/4290/2026 of M/s.SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD Vs D.BABU on 23 September 2026
CRP No. 4290 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP No. 4290 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA011453482025}
M/s.SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory, Branch office at Saravanampatti and having their Regional office at No.151, 1st Floor, Santhosh Palamuthir Nilayam, Marudhamalai Main Road, P.N.Pudur, Coimbatore.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. D.Babu
S/o.Devasagayam,
No.5/144, Indhra Nagar, Kaniyoor,
Karumathampatty, Palladam, Coimbatore.
2. B.Sheeba
W/o.Babu, No.5/144, Indhra Nagar, Kaniyoor, Karumathampatty, Palladam, Coimbatore.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: This Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of CPC, to set aside the order dated 28-10-2024 in EP.No.275 of 2019 in ACP.No.131 of 2017 on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge at Coimbatore and restore the Execution Petition.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.A.Swaminathan
For Respondent(s):
No Appearance
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The Execution Petition filed by the revision petitioner have been suo motu dismissed by the Executing Court,
CRP No. 4290 of 2026
holding that the very appointment of the Arbitrator was unilateral in nature. Admittedly, in the present case, the award sufferer has neither challenged the awards in a manner known to law, by filing a Section 34 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, nor even come forward to contest the execution petition as well. In the absence of any such challenge on the side of the award sufferers, the Executing Court cannot suo motu exercise a right to dismiss the execution petitions, on finding that the appointment of the Arbitrator was unilateral.
2. The Executing Court has dismissed the Execution Petition by exercising suo motu power on the ground that the appointment of the Arbitrator was originally unilateral in nature, though the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other Courts have taken a view that the objections with regard to the unilateral appointment can be taken at any stage of the proceedings, unless such an objection emanates from the award sufferer, the Court, suo motu, cannot take up upon itself, the task of objecting to the maintainability of the Execution Petition, citing unilateral appointment of the Arbitrator by this Court.
3. This Court also in CRP.No.5197 of 2024 dated 27.01.2025, in the matter of Sundaram Finance Limited Vs S.M.Thangaraj, in similar circumstances, held that the Executing Court cannot exercise suo motu power to dismiss the execution petition and that the decree holder is entitled to execute
CRP No. 4290 of 2026
the arbitral award and also reiterated the same in CRP. No.4649 of 2026, dated 31.08.2026, in Sundaram Finance Limited Vs A.Arun Kumar and another.
4. In light of the above, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order dated 28.10.2024 in E.P.No.275 of 2019 in ACP. No.131 of 2017, ont he file of the on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore is set aside, The Executing Court is bound to execute the awards as it stands. No costs. 23-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RKP To The II Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore.
CRP No. 4290 of 2026
P.B.BALAJI, J. RKP CRP No. 4290 of 2026 23-09-2026