Madras High Court
CMA(MD)/807/2024 of A.Renugadevi Vs R.Shanthanalakshmi on 4 November 2026
CMA(MD) No. 807 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE P.MURUGAN
CMA(MD) No. 807 of 2024
CNR:{HCMD010602202024}
AND
CMP(MD) No. 8851 of 2024
A.Renugadevi
..Petitioner
Vs
R.Shanthanalakshmi
..Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 37(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to call for the records pertaining to in
I.A No.1 of 2024 in Arbitration Case No.1 of 2024 on the file of the sole arbitrator S.Jeyavel Advocate at Kulithalai and set aside the same and allow the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
For Petitioner
: Mr. A.Thirumalai Raja.
*****
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.
JUDGMENT
The present appeal has been filed against the interim order passed by the Arbitrator under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Arbitrator is in Kulithalai Taluk, Karur District. __________
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 05:40:43 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 807 of 2024
2. As per Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Cancellation Act, 1996, “Court” means, The Principal Original Civil Court of the district concerned. Further, as per Section 37(2) of the said Act, an appeal against an order passed by the Arbitrator under Section 17 of the said Act would lie before the Court as per Section 2(1)(e) of the said Act, that is the Principal District Court concerned. Therefore, the appeal filed before this Court is not maintainable under Section 37 of the said Act.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that, pending the proceedings, the arbitral award has been passed and, therefore, the interim order has merged with the final arbitral award. Therefore, technically this appeal has become infructuous, both factually and legally.
4. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed as not maintainable, with the liberty to the appellant to work out the remedy in the manner known to law against the award passed by the Arbitrator before the District Court by filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside the award in the manner know to law. __________
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 05:40:43 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 807 of 2024
5. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as infructuous. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 04-11-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No jja To:-
1. The Sole Arbitrator, Kulithalai, Karur District. __________
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 05:40:43 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 807 of 2024 DR.P.MURUGAN, J. jja CMA(MD) No. 807 of 2024 AND CMP(MD) No. 8851 of 2024 04-11-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 05:40:43 pm )