Karnataka High Court
Capgemini Technology Services India ... vs Mrs. T.S.Gomathy on 23 June, 2023
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:21750
CMP No. 70 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 70 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED
(FORMERLY KNOWN AS IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS
LIMITED)
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT:
PLOT NO.14, RAJIV GANDHI INFOTECH PARK,
HINJAWADI PHASE, III, MIDC - SEZ,
VILLAGE MAN, TALUKA MULSHI,
PUNE - 411 057
MAHARASHTRA
HAVING OFFICE AT:
PLOT NO. 158-162 AND 165-170,
EPIP PHASE-II, WHITEFIELD,
Digitally BENGALURU - 560 056.
signed by
JUANITA REP BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE,
THEJESWINI MR. RENUKESH MAHADEVAPPA
Location: ...PETITIONER
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. PERIKAL K. ARJUN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MRS. T.S.GOMATHY
AGED MAJOR,
W/O LATE T.R.LAKSHMANAN,
R/AT NO. 415, LANE 9,
ADARSH PALM RETREAT,
DEVARABESANAHALLI,
BELLANDUR POST,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:21750
CMP No. 70 of 2023
BANGALORE - 560103.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.RAKSHITHA D.J., ADVOCATE)
THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION HAS FILED UNDER SECTION
11 (5) R/W SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO PASS THE FOLLOWING ORDERS,
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. (A) ALLOW THE
PRESENT PETITION AND APPOINT SUCH PERSON AS
ARBITRATOR AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT, AS THE
SOLE ARBITRATOR UNDER THE ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE THAT
HAS ARISEN BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN TERMS OF THE LEASE
DEED DATED APRIL 22. 2021 AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties in terms of Clause 27.2 of the of the lease deed dated 22.04.2021.-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:21750 CMP No. 70 of 2023
2. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits that the lease deed dated 22.04.2021 entered into between the parties herein contains an arbitration clause in Clauses 27.2 and 27.3. However, the learned counsel points out a subsequent settlement agreement dated 17.06.2022. Learned counsel submits that the respondent had paid a sum of Rs.6,94,751/- and therefore, the petitioner could not have terminated the contract. Learned counsel for the respondent would further submit that there was a locking period and the petitioner could not have terminated the lease deed.
3. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels and on perusing the petitioner papers, this Court finds that there cannot be any doubt that the parties had agreed for settle the disputes in terms of the arbitration clause contained in the lease agreement. It is also evident that there are some disputes that have arisen between the parties. Therefore, the dispute has to be resolved by an arbitrator in terms of the arbitration clause..
Consequently, this Court proceeds to pass the following order.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:21750 CMP No. 70 of 2023 ORDER
(a) The petition is allowed appointing Shri S.Siddalingesh, Retired District Judge, as the sole arbitrator to enter reference of the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent and conduct proceeding at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru according to the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre.
(b) All contentions inter se parties are left open for adjudication in the arbitration proceedings.
(c) The office is directed to communicate this order to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre and to Shri S.Siddalingesh, Retired District Judge, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012.
Sd/-
JUDGE rv