Karnataka High Court
Sri Shwethambar Stanakvasi Bawees vs C Sampathraj Khabia on 24 September, 2018
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Dinesh Maheshwari
C.M.P. No. 31/2015
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 31 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SHWETHAMBAR STANAKVASI BAWEES
SAMPRADAYA JAIN SANGHA (TRUST)
HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICE AT NO.9,
BHAGAVAN MAHAVEER ROAD,
(INFANTRY ROAD)
BANGALORE - 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
SRI. C. SAMPATH RAJ MANDOTH
2. M. PRAKASH CHAND MANDOTH
S/O. SRI MANGAL CHANDJI MANDOTH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/O. NO.115, SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051
3. P. LALCHAND MANDOTH,
S/O. SRI B.G. PUKHRAJ MANDOTH
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
R/O. NO.118, SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051
4. P. SUDARSHAN KUMAR
S/O. PARASMAL MANDOTH,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/O. NO.118, SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051
5. B. KANTHILAL PORWAL
S/O. SRI BHAWARLALJI PORWAL
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/O. NO.46, CHICK BAZAAR ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051
C.M.P. No. 31/2015
-2-
6. M. SAMPATHRAJ MANDOTH
S/O. SRI LATE MANGILALJI MANDOTH
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/O. NO.10, SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051.
7. MAHAVEER BOHRA
S/O. SRI LATE UTTAMCHAND BOHRA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/O. NO.70, SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051.
8. P. KISHORE KUMAR GADIA
S/O. PRITHVIRAJJI GADIA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/O. NO.46, SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI ABHINAV R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. C SAMPATHRAJ KHABIA
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS
S/O C. CHAGANMAL JAIN KHABIA
NO.30, SHIVAJI ROAD,
BANGALORE-51
2. D. SOHANLAL DEVADA
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS
S/O DULRAJ DEVADA
NO.65, SHIVAJI ROAD,
BANGALORE-51
3. M. PARASMAL ROONWAL
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
S/O A.C. MOTILALJI ROONWAL
NO.10, SHIVAJI ROAD,
BANGALORE-51
4. M. PARASMAL DEVADA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
S/O MANAKCHANDJI
NO.114, CHICK BAZAAR ROAD,
BANGALORE-51
C.M.P. No. 31/2015
-3-
5. UTTAMCHAND MUTTA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
S/O LATE SOHANLALJI MUTTA
R/O. PLANE STREET,
BANGALORE-51
6. P. VASANTHRAJ PORWAL
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
S/O G. PARASMALJI PORWAL
NO.35, CHIKKA BAZAR ROAD,
BANGALORE-51
7. U. SURENDRA KUMAR ROONWAL
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
S/O UTTAMCHAND ROONWAL
NO.172, SHIVAJI ROAD,
BANGALORE-51
8. SRI S. TRILOKCHAND KATARAIA
S/O. LATE SAMPATHRAJJI KATARIA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.171
SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU-51
9. R. KIRANRAJ PORWAL
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
S/O. SRI RATANCHANDJI PORWAL
R/AT NO.109, CHICK BAZAAR ROAD
BENGALURU-51
10. C. SURESHCHAND CHORDIA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
S/O. SRI CHAMPALALJI CHORDIA
NO.116, SHIVAJI ROAD
BENGALURU-51
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT ANANDITA SRINIVASAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI
C.M. POONACHA, ADVOCATE FOR R1-3, 5-8,10,
R4 - SERVED &
R9 - DISMISSED AS ABATED V.O.D 1.6.2018)
---
C.M.P. No. 31/2015
-4-
THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED
UNDER SEC.11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION
ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT ANY THREE RETIRED
HON'BLE JUDGES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT TO ACT AS AN
ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL IN TERMS OF THE ARBITRATION
CLAUSE 24 CONTAINED IN THE REGISTERED DEED OF
DECLARATION OF TRUST DATED: 14/11/2011 AT ANNEXURE-
A TO DISPUTES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
By way of this application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('the Act of 1996'), the petitioners have made the request for appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate upon and decide all their disputes with the respondents, arising out of, and relating to, the Deed of Declaration of Trust dated 14.11.2011.
The first petitioner is said to be a registered trust engaged in religious and charitable activities for the members of Jain community. It is the case of the petitioners that they had executed a Deed of Declaration of Trust dated 14.11.2011 in continuation with and in supplement to original Deed dated 11.03.1947.
C.M.P. No. 31/2015-5-
It is contended that the petitioner Trust started functioning through its Managing Committee but, over a period of time, the respondent nos. 1 to 4 started parallel activities, contrary to the terms of the Trust Deed and also intervened in the administration and functioning of the Trust. Hence, the petitioners served legal notice on 30.06.2014, calling upon the respondents to finalise the list of Member Trustees within 15 days so as to give a quietus to the entire issue, failing which arbitration proceedings would be initiated. The petitioner also suggested the names of Arbitrators to resolve the disputes. It is submitted that the respondents replied through their advocate, refusing to accede to the request of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the respondents also frankly submits that disputes do exist and hence, a Sole Arbitrator may be appointed to resolve the disputes between the parties.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.
C.M.P. No. 31/2015-6-
The limited aspect required to be considered in this application is as to whether there exists an arbitration agreement between the parties?
In fact, the existence of arbitration agreement in this matter is apparent on the face of the record. The arbitration clause, being Clause 24 in the Deed of Declaration, reads as under:
"In case of any dispute regarding the Trust and the contents of this Deed and administrations of Trust, no Trustee shall have the right to approach the court of law but the same shall be referred to an Arbitration of three or five persons as may be mutually appointed by the Trustee.."
From the material placed on record, it is evident that the petitioner issued notice proposing to initiate arbitration proceedings. But, the respondents did not even take steps for appointment of Arbitrators as required by the aforesaid arbitration agreement between the parties.
When the parties stand at conflict and the disputes do exist, which have not been resolved; and for the reason of failure of the procedure for appointment of Arbitrator, it is just and proper that an independent arbitrator be appointed to C.M.P. No. 31/2015 -7- adjudicate upon and decide the disputes between the parties, including their claims, counter claims and objections.
Now, learned counsel for the parties have fairly agreed to the appointment of Shri P.G. Nadagouda, a Retired District Judge, to act as an Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties under the provisions of the Act of 1996, as per the Rules governing the Arbitration Centre at Bengaluru.
Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by appointing Shri P.G. Nadagouda, a Retired District Judge, to enter into the said reference and to act as an Arbitrator in the present case in the Arbitration Centre, Bengaluru, as per the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre.
In the interest of justice, it is made clear that the Arbitrator shall adjudicate upon and decide all the disputes between the parties including their claims, counter claims and objections relating to the agreement in question. The requirements of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, [as amended by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015], shall be complied with by all the concerned. C.M.P. No. 31/2015 -8-
Needless to observe that all the questions arising between the parties in this matter shall remain open for determination in the arbitration proceedings.
A copy of this order be sent to the Arbitration Centre, Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru, for proceeding further in the matter on administrative side and also to Shri P.G. Nadagouda, a Retired District Judge, on the address available with the said Arbitration Centre, Bengaluru.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE brn