IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.140 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
GHOUSE SAHEB S/O LATE IMAM SAHEB AGED 68 YEARS, IMAM MANZIL 9TH CROSS, SHANKAR MATT ROAD K.R.PURAM, HASSAN, KARNATAKA. ...PETITIONER (By Smt.ASMITA DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR Sri UDAY SHANKAR.R.M., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. IMPERIUM CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., NO.18 SALEH CENTER, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560 051 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR SYED NAJMUL HASSAN SALEH 2. MOHMED FAYAZ AHMED S/O LATE ABDUL GAFFAR AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING ATN NO.101 TALUK OFFICE ROAD DEVANAHALLI ROAD BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS (R1 & R2 – served but unrepresented) The advocate for the petitioner has filed the above Civil Misc. Petition Under Sec.11(5, 6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, praying this Hon'ble Court:
a. To appoint a competent person as an Arbitrator to arbitrate the dispute between the parties as per Annexure-A.
b. To award costs of the petition and c. To grant such relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and expedient in the circumstances of the case.
This petition coming on for Admission, this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R Smt.Asmita Deshpande, learned counsel for Sri.Uday Shankar.R.M., learned counsel for the petitioner.
None appears for the respondents.
2. Petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. By means of this petition under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short), the petitioner seeks for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and has perused the records. Despite service of notice, the respondents have not chosen to appear and repudiate the averments made in the petition. From the perusal of the records, it is seen that the parties have entered into Joint Development Agreement on 23.01.2013. Thereafter, the dispute arose between the parties. Clause 23 of the aforesaid Agreement provides for an Arbitration Clause. The petitioner by a notice dated 23.03.2017 had invoked the Arbitration Clause. However, the respondents failed to take any action in terms of the notice issued by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court.
5. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and bearing in mind, the mandate under Section 11(6-A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, I deem it appropriate to appoint Dr.S.B.N.Prakash, Retired District and Sessions Judge as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
6. In view of preceding analysis the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 11(5) & (6) of the Act succeeds and is hereby allowed. In view of the aforesaid submissions, Dr.S.B.N.Prakash, Retired District and Sessions Judge is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
7. 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, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE DH