Karnataka High Court
Sri K Vijayaraj vs M/S Ritemed Pharma Retail Pvt Ltd on 8 January, 2024
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:792
CMP No. 696 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 696 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SRI K VIJAYARAJ
S/O LATE KANIK MALJI
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/AT HOUSE NO 250
GURUMURTHY REDDY LAYOUT
RAMURTHY NAGAR
BANGALORE 560016
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. S.HIMA KIRANA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S RITEMED PHARMA RETAIL PVT LTD
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO 12-07-20/64/2
Digitally SY NO 793, GOODS SHED ROAD
signed by MOOSAPET, HYDERABAD 560018
NARASIMHA
MURTHY REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
VANAMALA MR K S MURALI KRISHNA
Location: S/O MR K U B SHESHAGIRI RAO
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA 2. OPTIVE HEALTH SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED
H.NO:11-6-56, SY.NO.257 AND 258/1
OPP: IDPL RAILWAY SIDING ROAD
(MOOSAPET), KUKATPALLY
HYDERABAD, TELANGANA-560037
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. AKKI MANJUNATH GOWDA K., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:792
CMP No. 696 of 2022
THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION
ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO
RESOLVE THE DISPUTE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PARTIES
AS PER CLAUSE 20 OF ANNEXURE-A TO THE PETITION
DATED 20.04.2012.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents seeking appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of the Arbitration Agreement contained at Clause No.20 in the Agreement of Lease dated 20.04.2012 entered into between the parties.
2. Clause No.20 of the Agreement of Lease dated 20.04.2012, which is an Arbitration clause reads as under:-
"20. This agreement shall be interpreted, governed and construed under laws of India and all disputes, differences and questions relating to or arising out of this Agreement, including without limitation, any questions relating to the existence, validity and enforceability of any of the provisions of this Agreement, -3- NC: 2024:KHC:792 CMP No. 696 of 2022 shall be submitted to arbitration under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act") by a sole arbitrator appointed by the Lessee. During the pendency of any dispute under arbitration proceedings, the Parties shall continue to exercise their respective rights and fulfill their remaining obligations under this Agreement. With respect to such arbitration, the following provisions shall apply:
a) This arbitration proceedings shall be conduced in English;
b) The place of arbitration shall be Bangalore;
c) In respect of matters where a reference to the court is permitted by the Arbitration Act, the courts at Bangalore shall have exclusive jurisdiction;
d) The costs of arbitration shall be borne as determined in the arbitration award; and
e) The decision of the sole arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties"
3. The material on record discloses that since disputes arose between the parties in relation to the aforesaid Agreement containing the aforesaid arbitration agreement/Clause, the petitioner invoked the aforesaid arbitration clause and issued a notice dated 16.04.2022 to -4- NC: 2024:KHC:792 CMP No. 696 of 2022 the respondents putting forth various claims and contentions and nominating and appointing a sole arbitrator and calling upon the respondents to give their concurrence / consent to refer the dispute to arbitration.
4. The respondents did not send any reply nor denied or disputed the existence of arbitration agreement / clause in the contracts entered into between the parties. Subsequently, the parties have not only failed to resolve their disputes but they have also not reached any consensus / agreement for appointment of an arbitrator and as such, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. Even in the present petition, while the respondents have not filed their statement of objections, they have disputed and denied the various claims of the petitioner. However, the respondents do not dispute or deny the existence of arbitration agreement / clause in the contracts entered into between the parties.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, though several contentions have been -5- NC: 2024:KHC:792 CMP No. 696 of 2022 urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to the undisputed fact that there exists an arbitration agreement / clause in the contracts entered into between the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to allow this petition by referring the dispute between the parties to arbitration with the consent of both sides by appointing Sri. Radhakrishna Holla K., a retired District Judge, to act as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as per the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International) at Bengaluru.
6. In the result, I pass the following ORDER
(i) Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Sri. Radhakrishna Holla K., a retired District Judge, is hereby appointed as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute -6- NC: 2024:KHC:792 CMP No. 696 of 2022 between the parties as per the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International) at Bengaluru.
(iii) All rival claims, contentions, etc., of both parties including contentions relating to maintainability, arbitrability, jurisdiction, limitation, stamp duty, etc., are left/kept open to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal and no opinion is expressed on the same.
(iv) A copy of this order be sent forthwith to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru, for proceeding further and also to Sri. Radhakrishna Holla K., a retired District Judge, to the address available with the said Centre.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:792 CMP No. 696 of 2022
(v) Registry is directed to return all original documents produced by any of the parties after obtaining Photostat copies of the same.
SD/-
JUDGE RB