Kerala High Court
M/S.Narmada Consumer Stores (P) Ltd vs M/S.Palace Heights on 15 December, 2025
2025:KER:96473
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA,
1947
AR NO. 186 OF 2025
PETITIONER(S):
M/S.NARMADA CONSUMER STORES (P) LTD.,
KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, R.RAJESH, AGED 63 YEARS,
S/O.LATE K.RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT 'RAGHU
BHAVAN', T.C.NO.29/2588, TAGORE NAGAR,
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014.
BY ADV SRI.M.SREEKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
1 M/S.PALACE HEIGHTS,
NARMADA SHOPPING COMPLEX, KOWDIAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER, SRI.K.SASIDHARAN, S/O.LATE SRI.K.KUNJAN,
RESIDING AT 'PLAVILA VEEDU', KADUVAKUZHIKKARA,
MITHRUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAURAM, PIN - 695610.
2 K.SASIDHARAN,
S/O.LATE SRI.K.KUNJAN, RESIDING AT 'PLAVILA
VEEDU', KADUVAKUZHIKKARA, MITHRUMALA P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAURAM, PIN - 695610.
3 RAVINDRAN K.,
'LAKSHMI', ARAPPURA LANE, KANNAMMOOLA,
KUMARAPURAM, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011.
AR No.186 of 2025 2 2025:KER:96473
BY ADVS.
SHRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN
SMT.M.HEMALATHA
SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN
SMT.DONA AUGUSTINE
THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
AR No.186 of 2025 3 2025:KER:96473
JUDGMENT
This arbitration request is filed by a Private Limited Company. It owns northern block of a commercial complex building named as "Narmada Shopping Complex" situated at Kowdiar, Thiruvananthapuram. The applicant and the 1 st respondent were licensor and licensee. The 2nd and 3rd respondents are the partners of the 1 st respondent firm. A license agreement was executed by the 1 st respondent with the applicant on 01.04.1996 for a period of three years in respect of a specified area mentioned in the agreement having an extent of 154.87 sq.m. in the basement floor of North Block of the Shopping Complex to conduct a specified business.
2. According to the applicant, the 1 st respondent neglected to perform the conditions in the license agreement and a registered notice was issued on 01.08.1998 for termination of the license agreement. It resulted in filing O.S.No.1830/1998 by the 1st respondent and some others for permanent prohibitory injunction against eviction. O.S.No.2370/1998 was filed by the applicant seeking eviction of the 1st respondent and others. The suits were tried together by the Addl.Munsiff's Court (Rent Control Court), Thiruvananthapuram. O.S.No.2370/1998 was AR No.186 of 2025 4 2025:KER:96473 dismissed and O.S.No.1830/1998 was allowed. A.S.Nos.168/2009 and 170/2009 were filed before the District Court against the judgments of the learned Munsiff. The Appellate Court, in view of the arbitration clause in license agreement set aside the judgments and remanded the matter to Trial Court so as to enable the Trial Court to refer the parties for arbitration. The said remand was challenged before this Court in FAO (RO) Nos.350/2013, 353/2013 and 5/2014. This Court remanded the appeals to the Appellate Court for fresh consideration, in accordance with law. A copy of the common judgment of this Court dated 25.01.2022 is produced as Annexure A3.
3. Subsequently, the appeals were heard afresh and the judgments of the Trial Court were reversed by the Appellate Court. Respondents and others were directed to vacate the building. A copy of the judgment of the Addl.District Court, Thiruvananthapuram, is produced as Annexure A4. RSA Nos.114/2025 and 119/2025 were filed by the 1 st respondent against Annexure A4. Those appeals are pending before this court.
4. Later, the applicant issued notice seeking compensation for wrongful occupation of the building after termination of the arrangement. The 1 st respondent did not yield AR No.186 of 2025 5 2025:KER:96473 to the demand. Therefore, the arbitration clause is invoked by the applicant and reference to Arbitrator is sought in this arbitration request.
5. Notice was issued and respondents have entered appearance.
6. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that this request is not maintainable and no claim would lie against the parties on account of the principles of res judicata and waiver.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
8. Various contentions have been raised in this arbitration request and those contentions have been refuted on merits by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. In an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it is not within the domain of this Court to enter upon the merits of the disputes and make any observations and render findings. It is well settled that such aspects are to be left to the Arbitrator to consider. It is apposite to refer to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arabian Exports Private Limited v. National Insurance Company Ltd. [2025 SCC OnLine SC 1034], which reads as under:-
AR No.186 of 2025 6 2025:KER:96473 " 40. Thus, the doctrine of Kompetenz - Kompetenz is now firmly embedded in the arbitration jurisprudence in India. This doctrine is based on the principle that an arbitral tribunal is competent to rule on its own jurisdiction including on the issue of existence or validity of an arbitration agreement. The object is to minimize judicial intervention which is an acknowledgment of the concept of party autonomy."
9. The only aspect to be considered by this Court under Section 11 is regarding the existence of a valid arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties. On perusal of the agreement between the parties, it is clear that it contains an arbitration clause. Therefore, all contentions of the parties, including the validity of the arbitration clause, are left to be considered by the learned Arbitrator.
10. This Arbitration request is disposed of with the following directions:-
1. The Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre is directed to nominate an Arbitrator from Panel-III, preferably from Thiruvananthapuram, as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes that have arisen between the applicant and the respondents under Annexure A2 Agreement.
2. The learned Arbitrator may entertain all issues between the parties in connection with the said Agreements, including questions of jurisdiction and limitation, if AR No.186 of 2025 7 2025:KER:96473 any, raised by the parties. All contentions of the parties are left open and they are at liberty to raise their claims and counterclaims, if any, before the learned Arbitrator, in accordance with law.
3. The Registry shall communicate the substance of this order to the Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre within ten days and the Centre shall inform the learned Arbitrator within a further period of one week and shall obtain duly signed Form 3 as required under Rule 20(4) of the Kerala High Court (Arbitration Centre) Rules, 2025 and forward the same to this Court.
4. Upon receipt of the Form 3, the Registry shall issue a certified copy of this order with a copy of the Form 3 appended to the Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre. The original of the Disclosure Statement shall be retained by the Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre.
5. The fees of the learned Arbitrator of the Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre shall be governed by Rule 28 of the Kerala High Court (Arbitration Centre) Rules, 2025. The manner in which the fees and costs payable by the parties shall be governed by Rule 27 of the Kerala High Court (Arbitration Centre) Rules, 2025.
AR No.186 of 2025 8 2025:KER:96473
6. If the learned Arbitrator needs the assistance of an expert, then he is at liberty to seek such assistance in the course of the arbitration proceedings.
Sd/-
S.MANU
JUDGE
ANA
AR No.186 of 2025 9 2025:KER:96473
APPENDIX OF AR NO. 186 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES
OF THE BOARD MEETING DATED 06.05.2022 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF LICENSE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 01.04.1996 HAVING ARBITRATION CLAUSE AS CLAUSE NO.17 Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 25..01..2022 IN FAO(RO) NOS.350/13, 353/13 AND 5/2014 Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 17.12.24 OF ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN AS.NO.168/2009 & 170/2009 Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF REGISTERED LEASE DEED NO.
2455/2024 DATED 12.12.2024 Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF LICENCE DEED DATED 01.05.2024 Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
20..6..2025 ISSUED BY THE APPLICANT TO THE RESPONDENTS Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 7..7.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS TO THE APPLICANT