Karnataka High Court
Mr. Vinod Kannan S/O C V Kannan vs Mr. Pradeep Krishnan on 6 June, 2013
Author: H N Nagamohan Das
Bench: H.N. Nagamohan Das
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN DAS
C.M.P. No. 139/2011
BETWEEN :
--------------
Sri. VINOD KANNAN
S/O. C.V. KANNAN
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/A. No. 168, LA MARTINE
COLINAS, SAN GERMINO
MONTERREY, N.L., MEXICO - 644 630
REP. BY HIS GPA HOLDER
Sri. K RAGHUNATHAN
S/O. K.V. GOPALAN NAIR
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/A. KALLANGHAT HOUSE
AMBALAVETTAM VILLAGE POST
EDARIKKODE
MALAPURAM DIST., KERALA. ... PETITIONER
(By Sri. V RAMESH BABU, ADV.)
AND :
-------
Sri. PRADEEP KRISHNAN
S/O. K.C. KRISHNAN
2
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/A. No. D-1263, AECS LAYOUT
KUNDANAHALLI
BANGALORE - 37. ... RESPONDENT
(By Sri. AMARESH A ANGADI, ADV.)
---
THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 11 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION
ACT, 1996 WITH A PRAYER TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR
IN TERMS OF THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE No. 22 IN THE
PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 06.08.2003 AND ETC.
THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE
FOLLOWING;
ORDER
In this petition the petitioner has prayed for appointment of an arbitrator in terms of the partnership deed dated 06.08.2003 - Annexure B.
2. According to the petitioner he and the respondent entered into a partnership deed on 06.08.2003 as per Annexure B. Clause 22 of this partnership deed specifies that all disputes in connection with 3 the partnership deed shall be referred to an arbitration by two arbitrators to be appointed by the partners and in case of their disagreement to an umpire appointed by the said arbitrators.
3. On 18.05.2011 the petitioner got issued a lawyer's notice as per Annexure K for settlement of accounts. Annexure L is the acknowledgment for having served the lawyer's notice at Annexure K. The respondent has not replied to this notice. Thereafter the petitioner issued another notice as per annexure M dated 18.06.2011 suggesting the name of an arbitrator and requesting the respondent to suggest the name of arbitrator of his choice. Annexure N is the postal acknowledgment for having served the notice at Annexure M. Even to this notice there is no reply.
4. Further it is seen from the record that the petitioner while invoking the arbitration clause under the partnership deed also filed a civil suit against the respondent and another in O.S. No. 32/2013 on the file of Fast Track Court, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore. 4 In this O.S. No. 32/2013 the respondent herein entered appearance and filed objections inter alia contending that the partnership deed relied on by the petitioner is not registered and as such the suit is not maintainable under section 69 of the Partnership Act. Accepting the contention of the respondent herein the trial Court rejected O.S. No. 32/2013 as not maintainable. Therefore the petitioner is before this Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an arbitrator.
5. Heard arguments on both the side and perused the entire petition papers.
6. On one hand the petitioner contends that he and respondent entered into partnership deed as per Annexure B dated 06.08.2003. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no partnership between the parties and the alleged partnership deed relied on by the petitioner is a concocted document. It is further contended that Indus Electric a business concern is 5 purely a proprietary concern of the respondent. These contentions, in my opinion, can be a defence before the arbitrator. Merely because the respondent had taken this defence questioning the validity of the partnership deed the claim of the petitioner cannot be rejected.
7. Having regard to the correspondence between the parties, the filing of O.S. No. 32/2013, the objections raised by the respondent in the said suit and dismissal of the same are all circumstances to hold that there is a dispute between the parties to be agitated. The document relied on by the petitioner - Annexure B partnership deed provides for appointment of two arbitrators. Parties are in dispute on the question of appointment of arbitrators. In the circumstances the following;
ORDER i. Petition is hereby allowed.
ii. Sri. Syed Nisar Ahmed and Sri. N. Narayan, retired District Judges are appointed as arbitrators to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
6iii. The arbitrators shall conduct the proceedings in the Arbitration Centre at Bangalore as per the Rules framed by it.
iv. Registry is hereby directed to send a copy of this order to the arbitrators and also the Arbitration Center, Bangalore.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
LRS.