Karnataka High Court
M/S Primus Lifespaces Pvt Ltd vs Mr M Narayanaswami on 21 March, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:12056
CMP No. 374 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 374 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
M/S. PRIMUS LIFESPACES PVT. LTD.,
(FORMERLY MANTRI PRIMUS LIFESPACES PVT LTD.,)
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT,
HARA CHAMBERS, 22, 5TH FLOOR,
K H ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 027,
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
MR. ADARSH NARAHARI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAJESH B.L, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR. M. NARAYANASWAMI,
Digitally signed S/O MR. D. MUNINARASIMIAH,
by SUNITHA K S NO. 1213/6, WARD NO.3,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF BAGATHSINGH NAGAR,
KARNATAKA CHIKKABALLAPUR TOWN - 562 101.
...RESPONDENT
(BY MS. SREELATHA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. KRISHNA B.J, ADVOCATE)
THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION UNDER SECTION
11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996,
R/W RULE 2 OF SCHEME FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR
BY KARNATAKA HIGH COURT, PRAYING TO EXERCISE THE
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:12056
CMP No. 374 of 2024
POWER UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AND APPOINT A SUITABLE PERSON
AS ARBITRATOR IN PURSUANCE OF ARBITRATION CLAUSE 12
IN THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT DATED 05.05.2017 AT
ANNEXURE A AND FOR SUCH OTHER ORDERS DIRECTIONS
ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSIN, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
ORAL ORDER
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition as per Clause 12 of the Memorandum of Agreement dated 05.05.2017 vide Annexure-A.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this Civil Miscellaneous Petition are as under :-
The petitioner executed the Memorandum of Agreement (for short 'the MOA') dated 05.05.2017 with -3- NC: 2025:KHC:12056 CMP No. 374 of 2024 the respondent for entering into a sale agreement with respect to cluster of lands situated at Navaratnaagarhara Village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore Rural District. Under the said MOA an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was paid to the respondent towards advance sale consideration. It was incumbent upon the respondent to discharge the obligation thereunder within six months from the date of execution of MOA. Despite extension being granted by the petitioner several times, the respondent failed to fulfill the obligations under the said MOA. The respondent defaulted in discharging the obligation under the MOA. The petitioner issued a legal notice on 22.11.2023 stating that the petitioner had terminated the contract with immediate effect and called upon the respondent to return the advance sale consideration amount with interest @ 18% p.a.
3. The respondent replied to the legal notice. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice vide Annexure-D dated 10.05.2024. The -4- NC: 2025:KHC:12056 CMP No. 374 of 2024 respondent did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence this petition.
4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that no objection to appoint arbitrator for resolving the dispute between the parties.
6. Perused the records. The point that arise for consideration is as follows :-
"Whether petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties?"
7. Admittedly there is a MOA executed between the parties to the suit on 05.05.2017. Pursuant to the MOA the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent. The respondent did not perform the terms of the MOA. The petitioner got issued a legal notice on 20.12.2023 terminating the MOA and calling upon the -5- NC: 2025:KHC:12056 CMP No. 374 of 2024 respondents to return the amount advanced towards sale consideration with interest. The respondent did not reply to the said legal notice.
8. The petitioner has produced xerox copy of the MOA. Perused the MOA, wherein clause 12 provides that in the event of any dispute between the parties in relation to or arising out of this MOA, the said dispute shall be referred to the arbitration in terms of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
9. Admittedly there is an arbitration clause in the MOA since the dispute has arisen between the parties, and as such it has to be resolved by an arbitrator, in terms of Clause 12 of the MOA.
10. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that he has no objection to allow the petition.
11. In view of the above discussion the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the matter to the arbitrator. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:12056 CMP No. 374 of 2024 Accordingly I answer the point for consideration in the 'Affirmative'.
12. Hence, I pass the following :-
ORDER a. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. b. Smt. Premavati Mungoli, a retired District Judge is appointed as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties in terms of clause 12 of the MOA and in terms of the provision of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
c. Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator, Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bangalore.
SD/-
(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 CT: BHK