Case Summary
M/s. Shangrilla Financial Services Ltd. filed a suit against Anu Sasidharan and others for failing to repay a loan. The court determined that the matter should be referred to arbitration as per the loan agreement's arbitration clause.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The existence of a valid arbitration clause in the loan agreement was acknowledged.
The existence of a valid arbitration clause in the loan agreement was acknowledged.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is closed and the parties are referred to arbitration under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
M/s. Shangrilla Financial Services Ltd. (Age not specified years)
Edappally Branch, Pallippadan Highlights, Opposite St. George Church, Edappally P.O, Kochi – 682 024
Defendants
Anu Sasidharan (not known years)
Karikkethe House, Thalakode P.O, Mulamthuruthy, Ernakulam - 682 314
Kumari Sasidharan (approximately 53 years years)
Karikkethe House, Thalakode P.O, Mulamthuruthy, Ernakulam – 682 314
Praveen P.P (not known years)
Elanirakkode House, Nochulli P.O, Kuzhalmandam, Palakkad – 678 702
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The parties are referred to arbitration.
Evidence:
Hence, I am of the opinion that it is evident that suit at hand is one that deals with a subject matter that is covered under the arbitration clause and that the parties are therefore to be referred to arbitration under Section 8(1) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and that the suit cannot be proceeded with any further.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Loan Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The original loan agreement is produced by the plaintiff and relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext A1