IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA C.M.P. No.204/2017 BETWEEN:
JAYANTI CHIDAMBARAM AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, D/O LATE SRI.T.G.CHIDAMBARAM, R/AT NO.44/1, FIRST FLOOR, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VYALIKAVAL, BENGALURU-560 003.
(BY SRI T V VIJAY RAGHAVAN, ADV.) AND:
SMT. CHETHANA VARADARAJAN AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, W/O MR. YOGESH KUMAR, R/AT RATHAN, 20/1, 3RD MAIN, K.H.M BLOCK, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 032 ALSO AT SHOP NO.3, GROUND FLOOR, NO.44/1, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VYALIKAVAL, BENGALURU-560 003.
... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT IN TERMS OF THE CLAUSE 36 OF THE AGREEMENT OF LEASE DATED: 05/04/2016. B) TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF/RELIEFS AS THIS COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Though the petitioner has filed the instant petition relying on the provision contained in Clause 36 of the Agreement seeking appointment of the learned Arbitrator, the notice dated 17.06.2017 does not disclose that clause has been invoked and the name of the Arbitrator has been suggested.
2. In that view, the instant petition would be premature. The petitioner is however granted the liberty to issue an appropriate notice and thereafter approach this Court through a fresh petition.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE hrp/bms