Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Mangaluru Institute Of Fire And Safety Engineering vs The Karnataka State Open University In Short Ksou

High Court Of Karnataka|04 October, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA C.M.P. No.38/2017 BETWEEN:
MANGALURU INSTITUTE OF FIRE AND SAFETY ENGINEERING (MIFSE) MANAGED BY MINERVA EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST (R) OFFICE AT 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR, “CEE PEE”, NH-48, PUMPWELL MANGALURU-575002 DAKSHINA KANNADA KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY MR. VINOD K.J S/O SRI JOHN K M AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS (BY SRI NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADV.) AND:
THE KARNATAKA STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY IN SHORT KSOU, MUKTHAGANGOTRI (MANASAGANGOTHRI) MYSURU-560 006 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, DR.A.KHADAR PASHA ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT PERTAINING TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING DATED:04/08/2012 AS PER CLAUSE 14 OF THE SAID MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioner is before this Court in this petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’ for short) seeking appointment of the sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.
2. In respect of the terms and conditions agreed therein, certain disputes have arisen between the parties. The respondents herein in that view had issued a notice dated 12.05.2016 (Annexure-B) whereunder it was proposed to terminate the agreement. The petitioner he;’rein through their reply dated 11.11.2016 have raised certain disputes with regard to the contentions put forth in the notice issued by the respondents herein and by referring to the arbitration clause contained in the agreement have sought for appointment of the learned Arbitrator and had also suggested the name of a learned Arbitrator. The respondents however did not act upon such demand. The petitioner herein in that view filed proceedings under Section 9 of the Act in A.A.No.22/2016 (Annexure-D) for interim measure pending arbitration. In the said proceedings, the Court below having taken note of the Memorandum of Understanding and the provision contained for arbitration granted the interim relief. In the meanwhile, since the respondents have not appointed the learned Arbitrator, the petitioner is before this Court in this petition.
3. In the above background, a perusal of the Memorandum of Understanding would indicate that the parties through Clause No.14 have agreed that in the event of there being any dispute, the matter is to be resolved through arbitration. Further the exchange of the legal notices would indicate that certain disputes have arisen between the parties which are to be resolved through arbitration. The fact that the petitioner has instituted a petition under Section 9 of the Act and the same has been entertained by the Court below would indicate that the main dispute between the parties is to be resolved through arbitration.
4. In that view, considering the fact that the Clause contained in the Agreement also provides that the arbitration is to be held at Mysuru, an appropriate learned Arbitrator is required to be appointed to resolve the dispute between the parties.
5. Accordingly, Smt. H.S. Kamala, Retired District Judge, No.41, Akshaya, Aniketa South, 3rd Cross, Kuvempu Nagar, Mysuru – 23, is appointed to act as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.
6. Registry to dispatch a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator and to the petitioner as well as the respondents. The petitioner to also approach the learned Arbitrator and file necessary claim petition therein. The learned Arbitrator shall thereupon enter reference, issue notice to the parties, settle the terms of arbitration and proceed further in accordance with the provisions in the Act. All contentions on merits are left open to be urged before the learned Arbitrator.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE hrp/bms
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

Mangaluru Institute Of Fire And Safety Engineering vs The Karnataka State Open University In Short Ksou

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
04 October, 2017
Judges
  • A S Bopanna C