Patna High Court
Ramesh KumarversusM/S Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd.
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The court held that the writ petition is not maintainable because the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and therefore dismissed the petition.
Summary
The petitioner Ramesh Kumar filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari writ to set aside an ex-parte arbitration award dated 09-10-2020, alleging that the arbitrator passed the award without giving notice, violating natural justice. The petition claimed the award was issued under clause 15 of the loan‑cum‑hypothecation agreement without hearing the petitioner. The respondents argued that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to challenge the award. The court examined whether a writ petition is maintainable when a specific appeal under the Arbitration Act is available. It held that the existence of the Section 34 remedy precludes the writ petition and directed the petitioner to pursue that avenue. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed and the matter was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable when an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 exists.
- Whether an arbitration award can be set aside on the ground of violation of natural justice without prior notice to the parties.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Certiorari
- Natural Justice
- Section 34
- Writ Petition
- High Court
- Award Setting Aside
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15114 of 2025
======================================================
Ramesh Kumar S/o Hirdyanand Singh, Resident of Ward No. 4, Koilwar, P.O.
and P.S.- Koilwar, District- Bhojpur- 802160.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. M/S Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. Representation through its
Manager, Arrah Branch.
2. Kumar Abhay Parmar, Branch Manager, Shriram Transport Finance
Company Ltd., Kalira Mod, P.S.- Arah Nawada, District- Bhojpur.
3. Regional Business Head, Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd., Patna
(Bihar).
4. Nirbhay Kumar, S/o Brij Bihari Prasad, Resident of Village- Koilwar, P.S.-
Koilwar, District- Bhojpur, Pin- 802160.
5. The State of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary,Govt.of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (2)
Ms. Renu Kumari, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Rajan Prakash, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following
relief(s):-
“1. That this certiorari writ
application is being filed for setting aside the
ex-party order dated 09.10.2020 passed in
Arbitration Case saab No.AR/11/2020 by the
Arbitration Tribunal at Patna whereby and
whereunder learned Vijay Kant Jha (Retd.)
A.D.J. Sole Arbitrator Veena Mart Complex,
Near Bandhan Bank Ashiyana Digha Road,
Ashiyana, Patna-800025 has been made this
Patna High Court CWJC No.15114 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
Arbitration Award as per letter dated
02.03.2020 in view of clause 15 of the
Agreement for Arbitration to settle the dispute
interms of loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement
with respect to the breach and violation of terms
and condition mentioned in the agreement
executed by the Borrower and guarantor in
favour of the Chairman Company without giving
full opportunity of hearing the
respondent/petitioner which is violation of
Natural Justice. Further in the nature of
mandamus for issuance of direction to the
company to settle the issue on compromised
based.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner has approached this
Hon’ble Court by way of the present writ petition challenging
the award dated 09.10.2020. Learned counsel has stated that the
authority without issuing any notice to the petitioner has passed
the impugned award. Learned counsel has, therefore, prays this
Hon’ble Court to set aside the award and remand the matter
back to the arbitrator for passing orders afresh duly putting all
the parties on notice and giving him an opportunity of filing
their objections/ explanation.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the Respondent No. 2 has vehemently opposed the very
Patna High Court CWJC No.15114 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
maintainability of the present writ petition. Learned counsel has
stated that the petitioner is having an alternative and effective
remedy for filing a miscellaneous appeal under Section 34 of the
Arbitration Act against the award dated 09.10.2020. Learned
counsel submits that the petitioner can take all the grounds that
he has raised in the miscellaneous appeal. Learned counsel has,
therefore, prayed this Hon’ble Court to dismiss the present writ
petition.
5. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has an
alternative and effective remedy of filing a miscellaneous appeal
under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act against the award passed
by the arbitrator, this Court is not inclined to entertain the
present writ petition. The present writ petition is disposed of
granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate
authorities/court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act against
the award dated 09.10.2020, if he is so advised.
6. With the above directions, the present writ petition
stands disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Gauravkr/-
U
Checking your session…