Patna High Court
Deepak Kumar Mishra @ DeepakversusM/S Sri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The High Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable and dismissed it, directing the petitioner to seek relief under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Kumar Mishra, filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash an arbitration invocation notice dated 26 May 2025, which demanded payment of a loan amount of Rs. 8,33,599 within 15 days. The petitioner challenged the notice on the ground that the arbitrator selection process was improper. The High Court examined whether it had jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition against the procedural aspects of arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court held that the petitioner could either choose an arbitrator from the panel listed in the notice or file an application under Section 11 of the Act before the appropriate court. Consequently, the writ petition was not entertained and was disposed of, leaving the petitioner to pursue remedies under the Arbitration Act.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition under Article 226 can be entertained to quash an arbitration invocation notice.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to interfere with the arbitrator selection process under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Writ Petition
- Section 11
- High Court jurisdiction
- Loan dispute
- Certiorari
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15564 of 2025
======================================================
Deepak Kumar Mishra @ Deepak Son of Bishwambhar Mishra @
Vishambhar Mishra, resident of Dargah Mohammadpur, PO Mohammadpur,
Balal, PS Sakra, Distirct Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
M/S Sri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited, 2015 Luv Kush Tower,
Exhibition Road, Patna represented by its Authorized Representatives.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
“To issue an appropriate
order/s, direction/s including a writ
preferably in the nature of certiorari to
quash the arbitrator Invocation Notice
dated 26.05.2025 issued under the
signature of sole respondent directing the
petitioner to make the payment of Rs.
8,33,599/- due against loan amount
within 15 days of the receipt of the notice
failing which further communication shall
be sent to you by any of the Hon’ble
Arbitrators selected and name given in
the notice.”
3. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is only
challenging the invocation of the Arbitration vide notice dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.15564 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/2
26.05.2025 (Annexure P/5), this Court is not inclined to
entertain the present writ petition. The petitioner is having an
option of either choosing any one of the Arbitrator from the
panel of the Arbitrators shown in the said notice dated
26.05.2025 or file an application under Section 11 of the
Arbitration Act before the appropriate Court, if he is not
agreeable to the one suggested by the respondent. Having regard
to the same, the present writ petition is disposed of leaving it
open to the petitioner to take necessary steps as per the
provisions of the Arbitration Act.
4. With the above directions, the present writ petition
stands disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
shakir/-
U
Checking your session…