Cholamandalam Investments And Finance Company Ltd vs Anandu S — 15/2026
Case under Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996\ Section 17(2). Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED on 21st May 2026.
MA(Arb) - MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (ARBITRATION)
CNR: KLAL140001512026
Filing Number
15/2026
Filing Date
19-Feb-2026
Registration No
15/2026
Registration Date
20-Feb-2026
Court
Addl District Court, Mavelikkara/Rent Control Appellate Authority
Judge
1-Addl.Dist.and Sessions Judge-I Mavelikara/ Rent Control Appellate Authority
Decision Date
21-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED
Last updated 25-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Cholamandalam Investments And Finance Company Ltd
Adv. G GOPAKUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.Anandu S
-
2.Salin S
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
21-May-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: MA(Arb) 15/2026 Cholamandalam Investments and Finance Company Ltd. filed an arbitration application against borrowers Anandu S and Salin S regarding a vehicle financed through the company. The Additional District Judge dismissed the application as "not pressed" after the petitioner filed a memo stating the vehicle had already been repossessed, making the arbitration proceedings moot. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
21-May-2026
Disposed
Addl.Dist.and Sessions Judge-I Mavelikara/ Rent Control Appellate Authority
-
20-May-2026
Call on
Addl.Dist.and Sessions Judge-I Mavelikara/ Rent Control Appellate Authority
-
21-Mar-2026
For commission report
Addl.Dist.and Sessions Judge-I Mavelikara/ Rent Control Appellate Authority
-
21-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 15/2026
Case Summary: MA(Arb) 15/2026 Cholamandalam Investments and Finance Company Ltd. filed an arbitration application against borrowers Anandu S and Salin S regarding a vehicle financed through the company. The Additional District Judge dismissed the application as "not pressed" after the petitioner filed a memo stating the vehicle had already been repossessed, making the arbitration proceedings moot. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts