IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2011 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1933 OP(C).No. 336 of 2011(O) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER ------------------- RAVEENDRAN.K.V., S/O.KUNHAMBU, 283/5, DEVI KRIPA, P.O.MALOOR, (VIA) MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. M/S.SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, 4TH FLOOR, HYPER CENTRE, NEW RAILWAY STATION ROAD, THALASSERY REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI.DASAN. 670 101. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATTANNUR.670 702. 3. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, THALASSERY. 670 101 4. B.P.SASEENDRAN, ADVOCATE,SOLE ARBITRATOR ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL, TRADE CENTRE, YOGASALA ROAD, KANNUR- 670 001. R1 BY ADV.SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.SAJEEVAN THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(C) NO.336/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PERMIT DTD. 18.6.2010 OF VEHICLE NO.KL-13-M- 5899. P2:- COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE R.C. BOOK IN VEHICLE NO.KL-13-M- 5899. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC. NO.23670/2010 DTD. 4.8.2010. P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 13.12.2010. P5:- COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 30.12.2010 WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD. P6:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT.D 2.1.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P7:- COPY OF THE IA. NO.1/2011 IN ARBITRATION OP. 13/2011 DTD. 18.1.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss P. BHAVADASAN, J. ........................................... O.P.(C).NO.336 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2011. JUDGMENT This original petition is directed against Ext.P7 order passed in I.A.No.1/2011 in Arbitration O.P.No.13/2011. The matter relates to a financial transaction between the petitioner and the first respondent regarding hire purchase. In violation to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the 1st respondent appointed the 4th respondent as the arbitrator and issued an ex parte interim order directing the petitioner to surrender the vehicle. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that when he received Ext.P7, he had not given any notice of arbitration proceedings and he was unaware of the same. He received the notice later and therefore he prays that giving an opportunity to approach the appropriate forum this original petition may be disposed of. The interim order is passed under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Reserving liberty of the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum, this original petition is disposed of. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. cl