Mphasis Limited vs Metadata Technologies Private Limited on 10 February, 2017

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mphasis Limited vs Metadata Technologies Private 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.221/2016

BETWEEN:

MPHASIS LIMITED
BAGMANE WORLD TECHNOLOGY CENTRE
MARATHALLI OUTER RING ROAD,
DODDANAKUNDI VILLAE,
MAHADEVAPURA BENGALURU - 560093
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
MR. HEMANTH ANANTH RAM.
                                         ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DHANANJAY JOSHI, ADV.)

AND:

METADATA TECHNOLOGIES
PRIVATE LIMITED
NO 2594, 1ST FLOOR,
RAMADAS COMPLEX,
M.K.K. ROAD,
RAJAJINAGAR 2ND STAGE,
BANGALORE - 560010.
                                        ... RESPONDENT

(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS H/S)

     THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(4) R/W 11(6) 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 IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES
AGREEMENT, DATED: 03/12/2012 (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 Implementation Services Agreement dated 03.12.2012 whereunder the respondents are stated to have engaged the services of the petitioners to provide implementation services required for the National Population Register Biometrics Project in the States of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh 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. Despite submission of the invoices, the amount due has not been 3 paid. In that view, a notice dated 30.06.2016 as at Annexure-F 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-4 of the Implementation Services Agreement.

4. The document at Annexure-G 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 Implementation Services Agreement at Clause-4 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.K. Mulla, 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