IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE C.M.P. NO.319 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
MR. ANANDA N. SHETTY S/O. NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS KAMBALAGUTTA HOUSE YEKKARU, VIA PERMUDE KATIL, MANGALURU TALUK – 575 001 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. CYRIL PRASAD PAIS, ADV.) AND:
1 SRI. AJITH KUMAR SHETTY S/O. K. MAHABALA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT HARI KRIPA HOUSE KARNAD, MULKI, MANGALURU TALUK – 574 154 2 SRI. M. BHASKAR SHETTY S/O. LATE JAGANATH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT ‘AKILA’, NEAR CHURCH, KARNAD, MULKI MANGALURU – 574 154 ... RESPONDENTS [RESPONDENTS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED] THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11[5] OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO ARBITRATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS, AS PER THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 17.03.2007 AS WELL AS THE RECONSTITUTION DEED DATED 10.04.2009 OF THE FIRM, HINDUSTAN CEMENT PIPE COMPANY, COPIES OF WHICH ARE PRODUCED AS ANNEXURES – A AND C TO THE PETITION AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Mr. Cyril Prasad Pais, learned Counsel for the petitioner.
None appears for the respondents. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the petitioner, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner, inter alia, seeks appointment of an Arbitrator.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length. On perusal of the records, it is evident that the parties had entered into Partnership Deed on 17.03.2007. The aforesaid partnership deed contains an arbitration clause which reads as under:
“All disputes arising between the partners or their legal representatives about the interpretation of this Deed on their rights and liabilities there under on in relation to any other matters whatsoever touching the affairs of this Partnership shall be decided by Arbitration as provided by the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.”
4. The petitioner had sent a legal notice on 5.9.2017 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator. However, no response was received by the petitioner to the aforesaid notice. In view of the arbitration clause contained in the partnership deed, the dispute is required to be adjudicated by the Arbitrator. Taking into account the fact that the venue of the arbitration is at Mangaluru and the parties are residents of Mangaluru, Mr. Moosa Kunhi Nayarmoole, Retired District & Sessions Judge, who is based in Mangaluru is appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
5. Needless to state that it would be open to the respondents to raise all such contentions as may be available to him under the law before the sole Arbitrator.
6. Office is directed to transmit a copy of this order to Mr. Moosa Kunhi Nayarmoole, Retired District & Sessions Judge.
Petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-