Manappuram Finance Ltd Rep By Its Ara Manager Authorized Rep By Rakesh Veerapur vs Benjamin Ruban — 150/2025
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section UNDER ORDER XXI RULE 54 & 66, 72 AND SECTION 151 CPC. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED WITHOUT COSTS on 15th May 2026.
EP - Execution Petition
CNR: TNKK050002612025
e-Filing Number
29-02-2024
Filing Number
192/2025
Filing Date
02-Mar-2024
Registration No
150/2025
Registration Date
31-Dec-2025
Court
Special Sub Court to deal with forest offence cases, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari
Judge
1-Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
Decision Date
15-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED WITHOUT COSTS
Last updated 19-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Manappuram Finance Ltd Rep By Its Ara Manager Authorized Rep By Rakesh Veerapur
Adv. G Veludhas
Respondent(s)
-
1.Benjamin Ruban
-
2.Guriz Michael
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
15-May-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
The court dismissed Manappuram Finance Ltd.'s execution petition seeking to recover Rs. 5,58,255 from the respondents based on an arbitral award. The court found the underlying arbitral award void because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally by the petitioner without the respondent's consent or knowledge, violating Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act, and the award was passed ex parte without affording natural justice to the respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
15-May-2026
Disposed
Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
-
30-Apr-2026
Orders
Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
-
15-Apr-2026
Enquiry
Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
-
26-Mar-2026
Enquiry
Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
-
11-Mar-2026
Enquiry
Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
-
18-Feb-2026
Enquiry
Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
-
05-Feb-2026
Enquiry
Special Judge for Forest Offence Cases
-
19-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Mar-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 150/2025
The court dismissed Manappuram Finance Ltd.'s execution petition seeking to recover Rs. 5,58,255 from the respondents based on an arbitral award. The court found the underlying arbitral award void because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally by the petitioner without the respondent's consent or knowledge, violating Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act, and the award was passed ex parte without affording natural justice to the respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts