SB Civil Misc. Appeal No.1564/2008 IndusInd Bank Ltd Vs. Kiranjeet Singh 1 SB Civil Misc. Appeal No.1564/2008 IndusInd Bank Ltd Vs. Kiranjeet Singh DATE OF ORDER : - 18.12.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Dr. SS Jodha, for the appellant. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant-financier is aggrieved against the order dated 16th September, 2008 passed by the court of Addl. District Judge No.3, Udaipur on application submitted by the respondent under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It appears from the facts of the case that according to the respondent-applicant before the trial court total due amount of the appellant-non-applicant was Rs.44,122/-, which he was ready to pay to the appellant. He prayed that on his payment of said amount, the appellant should issue NOC. The appellant submitted reply and stated that as per the statement of accounts as on 16th September, 2008, the total due amount was Rs.55,872.41/-. So far as settlement SB Civil Misc. Appeal No.1564/2008 IndusInd Bank Ltd Vs. Kiranjeet Singh 2 of dispute through arbitration is concerned, with respect to the total amount of Rs.11,000/- and odd, the parties were in agreement for referring the matter to the arbitrator. However, the trial court after hearing the arguments held that since the dispute with respect to the petty amount of Rs.11,000/- and odd will remain and that can be adjudicated by the arbitrator then there is no reason to deny the prayer of the respondent, who prayed that he is ready to deposit the due amount, which according to him is due and that too, of Rs.44,122/-. In that situation, if the substantial part of the claim of the appellant stands satisfied and, there remains a dispute of Rs.11,000/- and odd only, there cannot be any justification for not issuing NOC to the respondents by the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant's contention is that there is no need to issue NOC because of the reason that there will be due amount as per the claim of the appellant against the respondent and by issuing NOC, their rights may be prejudiced. The apprehension of the appellant is having no legal SB Civil Misc. Appeal No.1564/2008 IndusInd Bank Ltd Vs. Kiranjeet Singh 3 foundation because of the reason that they already raised their claim and brought to the notice of the trial court and they are not issuing the NOC voluntarily, but under the order of the trial court. Therefore, that issuance of NOC is under protest and cannot be said to be issued for settlement of entire claim of the appellant. Otherwise also, the vehicle in question is in possession of the applicant and he is paying the substantial amount then the appellant can certainly mentioned this fact on NOC that the NOC is issued in pursuance of the court's order dated 16th September, 2008. In view of the above reason this court do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. Hence, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.goyal/-