Madras High Court
ARB APPLN/2584/2026 of Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co Ltd Vs GANPATI ENTERPRISES PROP MR GANESH SINGH on 11 November 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.11.2026
CORAM :
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Arb.Appln.No.2584 of 2026
M/s.Cholamandalam Investment and
Finance Company Limited,
‘Chola Crest’, C 54 & 55, Super B-4,
Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate,
Guindy, Chennai – 600 032,
Represented by its Authorised Signatory
.. Applicant
Versus
M/s.Ganpati Enterprises,
Prop Ganesh Singh
.. Respondent
Prayer : Arbitration Application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of Original Side Rules read with Section 9(1)(ii)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to direct the respondent to furnish security for the sum of Rs.20,48,400/- within a time fixed by this Court failing which to order attachment of the immovable properties morefully described in the Schedule to the Judges Summons till enforcement of the award passed in the arbitration proceedings and a copy of the attachment order be transmitted through the District & Sessions Court, Raigarh, Chattisgarh and communicated to Registrar Office, Raigarh, District, Raigarh (C.G.)
and the attachment order may be hand delivered to the applicant for transmission.
For Applicant
: Mr.D.Pradeep Kumar
For Respondents
: No appearance
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:03 pm )
Arb.Appln.No.2584 of 2026
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
grs
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
It can be seen that by the order, dated 13.10.2026, the respondent was directed to furnish security to a tune of Rs.20,48,400/-. Even though notice has been served, the respondent neither furnished security nor appeared before this Court and shown cause as to why he should not furnish the security. It is also seen that award has been passed.
2. In view thereof, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for the attachment of the property mentioned in the schedule.
3. This application is ordered as prayed for. 11.11.2026 Neutral Citation : yes/no grs To
1. The District and Sessions Court, Raigarh, Chattisgarh.
2. The Sub-Registrar, Raigarh, Chattisgarh.
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:03 pm )