IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.63 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
SRI G. DAYANAND REDDY S/O. LATE GOVINDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO.205, AMBALIPURA BEHIND TRINITY WOODS SARJAPURA ROAD BANGALORE-560 103. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI G.R. LAKSHMIPATHY REDDY, ADV.) AND:
1. SMT. SUDHA MANJUNATHA W/O. SRI K. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 2. SMT. RASHMI M. NATH D/O. K. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 3. SMT. KEERTHANA MANJUNATHA D/O.K. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.117, 3RD MAIN ROAD SUN CITY LAYOUT J.P. NAGAR, 7TH PHASE BANGALORE-560 078. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADV.) THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE AS PER ANNEXURE-C AND GRANT THE COST OF THIS PETITION ALONG WITH SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS THAT MAY BE DEEMED NECESSARY TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri G.R. Lakshmipathy Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner. Sri Devi Prasad Shetty, learned counsel for respondents.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner inter alia seeks for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
4. The facts leading to filing of the petition briefly stated are that the parties had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on 24.09.2016.
Clause-8 of the aforesaid Memorandum of Understanding contains an arbitration clause which reads as under:
“8. Any dispute arising out of this Understanding shall be solved by an Arbitrator duly appointed by both the parties jointly as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and all the proceedings shall be in English language and shall be within the jurisdiction of Bangalore”.
5. Since the dispute had arisen between the parties, the petitioner had sent a legal notice dated 22.12.2017. However, the respondents did not file any response to the aforesaid notice. In the above said factual background, the petitioner has approached this Court.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.
7. Admittedly, the Memorandum of Understanding dated 24.09.2016 executed between the parties is in writing which contains an arbitration clause, the petitioner had sent a notice to the respondents. However, the respondents have failed to respond to the same.
8. Therefore, in view of Clause-8 contained in the Memorandum of Understanding dated 24.09.2016, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, Mr. M. Nagarajan, Ex-CAT Member is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. Office is directed to transmit a copy of this order to Mr. M. Nagarajan, Ex-CAT Member.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST