Mphasis Limited vs Visionindia Software Exports Limited on 10 February, 2017

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mphasis Limited vs Visionindia Software Exports Limited on 10 February, 2017

Bench: A S Bopanna

                            1


  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA

                   C.M.P. No. 144/2016

BETWEEN:

MPHASIS LIMITED,
BAGMANE WORLD
TECHNOLOGY CENTRE,
MARATHALLI OUTER RING ROAD,
DODDANAKUNDI VILLAGE,
MAHADEVAPURA,
BENGLAURU-560 048.
REP. BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT LEGAL
HEMANTH ANANTH RAM.
                                            ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DHANANJAY JOSHI, ADV.)

AND:

VISIONINDIA SOFTWARE
EXPORTS LIMITED,
PLOT NO.14,
SHUBHANKAR BUNGALOW,
DHANASHREE COLONY,
NEAR CUMMINS ENGINEERING
COLLEGE, KARVE ROAD,
PUNE-411 052.
                                           ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. KRISHNA NAGNOOR, ADV. (ABSENT))


     THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6)
R/W SECTION 15(2) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION
ACT 1996, PRAYING TO CONSTITUTE AN ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
BY APPOINTMENT OF A SUITABLE PERSON AS THE SOLE
ARBITRATOR FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF THE PETITIONER'S
CLAIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAID MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING, DATED 01.02.2012 (ANNEXURE - A) AND ETC.
                              2



     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                        ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('the Act' for short) seeking that a sole Arbitrator be appointed to resolve the dispute between the parties.

2. The petitioners and the respondents have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 01.02.2012 whereunder the respondents are stated to have engaged the services of the petitioners for collection of the data as indicated therein.

3. The case of the petitioners is that they have carried out the work in terms of the agreement towards which the payment is due from the respondents. The invoices as raised by the petitioners is produced along with the petition to contend that despite submission of the invoices, the amount due has not been paid. In that 3 view, a notice dated 22.03.2016 as at Annexure-C was issued whereunder the claim was made and also it was indicated that in the event of the same not being paid, the matter would be referred to Arbitration in terms of Clause-8.1 of the Memorandum of Understanding.

4. The document at Annexure-E indicates that the notice is served on the respondents, but the respondents have not chosen to respond to the same. In the instant petition also, no objection is filed to the petition. A perusal of the Memorandum of Understanding at Clause-8.1 provides that in the event of there being any dispute between the parties, the same is to be resolved through arbitration under the provisions of the Act.

5. In that view, the prayer made in the petition is accepted. Sri A.C.Vidyadhara, learned District Judge (Retd.) is appointed to act as the sole Arbitrator. 4

6. A copy of this order be dispatched to the Arbitration Centre, Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru for necessary action in that regard. Learned counsel for the petitioner to also approach the Arbitration Centre with the relevant papers to be filed therein. The learned Arbitrator appointed herein shall thereupon enter reference and proceed with the matter in accordance with law and the Rules governing the Arbitration Centre.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE akc/pgg

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court