Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

M/S Madvisory vs Rashekar Patil

High Court Of Karnataka|10 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.70 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
M/s.M.1 Advisory Having its Corporate Office At Plot No.23 & 24, Level-1 AMR Tech Part 2A Hosur Main Road Near Oxford College Bangalore – 560 068 Represented by its Proprietor Mr.Siva Ram Krishna Prasad Musunuri (By Sri.Chandrashekar Patil, Advocate) AND:
M/s.VNG Developers A registered partnership Firm Having its office at Plot No.7 M.N.Gurugokulam Apartments Thirumenahalli Main Road Agrahar Layout, Kogilu Yelahanka, Bangalore – 560 064 Represented by its Partners & Authorized representative Sri.Mukka Vinod Kumar ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT (By Sri.N.Krishnamurthy, Advocate ) This CMP is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to appoint a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes and differences arisen between the applicant/petitioner and respondent, as per the terms of the said Marketing Agreement dated 30.10.2013 and etc.
This CMP coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. Chandrashekar Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. N.Krishnamurthy, learned counsel for respondent.
The petition is admitted for hearing and the same is heard finally.
2. By means of this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’, for short), the petitioner inter alia seeks appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
3. On perusal of the records, it is evident that the parties had entered into an agreement on 30.10.2013. The said agreement contains an arbitration Clause 10 to resolve the disputes between the parties by arbitration. Petitioner sent notice on 10.01.2018 invoking arbitration clause. Later, the respondent replied to the said notice dated 22.01.2018.
4. In the aforesaid factual background, petitioner has approached this Court seeking appointment of an arbitrator.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and bearing in mind the mandate contained in Section 11(6-A) of the Act as well as the fact that the parties had entered into an agreement and the said agreement, admittedly, contains an arbitration clause and the dispute between the parties have arisen with regard to the aforesaid agreement, I deem it appropriate to appoint Hon’ble Mr.Justice Ajit J.Gunjal, Former Judge of this Court as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
6. Accordingly, this petition under Section 11(6) of the Act is disposed of by appointing Hon’ble Mr.Justice Ajit J.Gunjal, Former Judge of this Court to enter into the said reference of Arbitration and act as an Arbitrator in the present case in the Arbitration Centre, Bengaluru, as per the Rules governing in the said Arbitration Centre.
A copy of this order be sent to the Arbitration Centre, Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru for proceeding further in the matter, on administrative side and also to Hon’ble Mr.Justice Ajit J.Gunjal, Former Judge of this Court on the address available with the said Arbitration Centre, Bengaluru.
Accordingly, petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Prs*
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M/S Madvisory vs Rashekar Patil

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
10 April, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe Civil