M/S Shriram City Union Finance Ltd, rep by its autorised Signatory E. Marappan vs Mejila and anr Advocate - Adv D.Arul Thimilan — 53/2021
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 151. Status: Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
EP - Execution Petition
CNR: TNKK010009092021
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
Filing Number
144/2021
Filing Date
05-02-2021
Registration No
53/2021
Registration Date
01-04-2021
Court
Principal District Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M/S Shriram City Union Finance Ltd, rep by its autorised Signatory E. Marappan
Adv. Adv G.Siva Raja Boopathy
Respondent(s)
Mejila and anr Advocate - Adv D.Arul Thimilan
Hygense Pinton
Adv. Adv D.Arul Thimilan
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC
Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC
Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC
Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC
Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC |
| 23-02-2026 | Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC |
| 09-02-2026 | Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC |
| 12-01-2026 | Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC |
| 17-11-2025 | Proclamation Under Section 82,83 CRPC |
Interim Orders
Summary: The execution petition filed by M/s. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. to enforce an arbitral award against Mrs. Mejila and Mr. Hygense Pinton has been allowed. The court rejected the respondents' counter-objections to the award's legality and enforceability, noting that the court cannot override the award unless it is set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act or by a higher court. No evidence of payment was found. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The execution petition filed by M/s. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. to enforce an arbitral award against Mrs. Mejila and Mr. Hygense Pinton has been allowed. The court rejected the respondents' counter-objections to the award's legality and enforceability, noting that the court cannot override the award unless it is set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act or by a higher court. No evidence of payment was found. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts