IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.289 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
MR.A.RAMAKRISHNA MAJOR, S/O SRI ANJANEYACHAR, R/AT NO.33, OPP: SRI RAMA TEMPLE, BYATARAYANAPURA, BENGALURU – 560 092.
(BY SRI SRINANDAN K., ADVOCATE FOR SRI BADRI VISHAL, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI VENUGOPAL AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O LATE N.SHAMANNA, 2. SMT.MANJULA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, D/O LATE N.SHAMANNA, 3. SMT.MAMATHA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, D/O LATE N.SHAMANNA, 4. SMT.LAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, W/O LATE N.SHAMANNA, … PETITIONER ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.9, 1ST MAIN, 1 CROSS, NEERUBAVI, KEMPANNA LAYOUT, HEBBAL, BENGALURU-560 024.
ALSO AT HEBBAL VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560 024.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRASANNA V.R., ADVOCATE AND SRI SHARATH KUMAR H.N., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4) THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS CMP COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Sri Srinandan K., learned counsel on behalf of Sri Badri Vishal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Prasanna V.R., and Sri Sharath Kumar H.N., learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. On 27.03.2019, the matter was adjourned for two weeks at the request of learned counsel for the petitioner to explore the possibility of amicable settlement of the dispute and it was also made clear that on the next date of hearing, no further adjournment, including the absence of the arguing counsel shall be granted. However, when the matter was taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner has once again sought for adjournment. The aforesaid prayer is declined.
3. Perused the records. The petition is admitted for hearing and the same is heard finally.
4. By means of this petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short), the petitioner inter alia seeks for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
5. Admittedly, the parties had entered into an agreement on 19.02.2008. Clause No.11 of the aforesaid agreement contains an arbitration clause. The dispute has arisen between the parties in relation to the aforesaid agreement. In that regard, the respondents sent two notices dated 27.06.2016 and 15.07.2016 to the petitioner. The petitioner had sent a reply to the said notices on 22.08.2016 invoking the arbitration clause. Thereafter, the respondents sent a reply notice dated 17.09.2016 denying the existence of the arbitration clause. Hence, the present petition has been filed.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the Clause 11 of the aforesaid agreement, which contains the arbitration clause as well as bearing in mind the mandate contained in Section 11(6-A) of the Act, I deem it appropriate to appoint Sri G.Raghavendra Rao, retired District and Sessions Judge as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
7. Needless to state that it will be open to the respondents to take all such objections admissible to him in the law before the arbitrator.
8. A copy of this order be dispatched to the Arbitration Centre, Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru, for necessary action in that regard. Learned counsel for the petitioner to also approach the Arbitration Centre with the relevant papers to be filed therein. The learned Arbitrator appointed herein shall thereupon enter reference and proceed with the matter in accordance with law and the Rules governing the Arbitration Centre.
Accordingly, petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE PB