Karnataka High Court
Dtdc Express Ltd vs M/S Narendra Enterprises on 5 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:7044
CMP No. 623 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 623 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
DTDC EXPRESS LTD
OFFICE AT NO. 5, CORPORATE ANNEX - 2,
VICTORIA ROAD,
BENGALURU 560047
REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED PERSON
SHIVAPRASAD, SR. MANAGER
...PETITIONER
Digitally signed
by KIRAN
KUMAR R (BY SRI. VIVEK R., ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. M/S NARENDRA ENTERPRISES
A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN
OFFICE AT NO. 11, SEN PASHCHIM PARA,
KALYANIPURA, KANPUR NAGAR,
UTTAR PRADESH - 208001
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:7044
CMP No. 623 of 2025
HC-KAR
REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR
MR. NARENDRA KUSHWAHA
2. MR. NARENDRA KUSHWAHA
SON OF SURESH KUSHWAHA
PROPRIETOR OF M/S NARENDRA ENTERPRISES
NO. 11. SEN PASHCHIM PARA,
KALYANIPURA, KANPUR NAGAR,
UTTAR PRADESH - 208001
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 & R2 ARE SERVED)
THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF
ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO
APPOINT AN IMPARTIAL, FIT AND PROPER PERSON AS SOLE
ARBITRATOR THEREBY CONSTITUTE THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
FOR ADJUDICATING THE DISPUTES AND CLAIMS OF THE
PETITIONER AS RAISED AS PER CLAUSE 27.02 AND 27.3 IS
SALES AGREEMENT DATED 02.08.2024 ANNEXUE A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
*******
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:7044
CMP No. 623 of 2025
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
ORAL ORDER
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondents in terms of clause 27.2 and 27.3 in the Franchisee agreement dated 02.08.2024, vide Annexure-A.
2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this Civil Miscellaneous Petition are as follows:
3. The respondent entered into Franchisee agreement dated 02.08.2024 for courier services and obtained the services in accordance with the Franchisee agreement. The respondent availed the courier services amounting to a sum of ₹ 57,64,295.60/-. The respondent is in due of a sum of ₹57,64,295.60/-. The petitioner issued a demand notice to the respondents on 02.04.2025 -4- NC: 2026:KHC:7044 CMP No. 623 of 2025 HC-KAR calling upon the respondent to pay the amount as demanded. The respondent failed to pay the amount. There is an arbitration clause 27 in the Franchise Agreement dated 02.08.2024. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act on 13.08.2025 vide Annexure F. The respondent did not come forward to nominate the arbitrator. Hence, this petition.
4. Notice was issued to the respondents. Despite the service of notice, the respondents remained unrepresented.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.
6. The point that would arise for consideration is as follows:
"Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator in terms of clause -5- NC: 2026:KHC:7044 CMP No. 623 of 2025 HC-KAR 27 of the franchisee agreement dated 02.08.2024 as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?"
7. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and respondents have entered into Franchisee agreement dated 02.08.2024 vide Annexure-A. The respondent had availed the courier service. The respondent has a dues outstanding to the tune of ₹57,64,295.60/-. The petitioner issued a demand notice calling upon the respondents to repay the said amount on 02.04.2025. Despite the service of the demand notice, the respondents neither replied to the demand notice nor paid the amount claimed in the demand notice. There is an arbitration clause in the franchise agreement dated 02.08.2024, which reads as follows:
27.2: Where the dispute under Clause 27.1 is not amicably resolved within 30 (thirty) days of issuance of the Dispute Notice, the Parties hereby agree to refer the dispute to a SOLE ARBITRATOR who shall be appointed by mutual consent of both -6- NC: 2026:KHC:7044 CMP No. 623 of 2025 HC-KAR Parties. The reference and adjudication of the dispute shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended from time to time ("Arbitration Act") The award given by the said Sole Arbitrator shall be binding upon both Parties. The seat of arbitration shall be Bengaluru, Karnataka.
8. From the perusal of clause 27.2, it is evident that, if the dispute arises between the parties to the petition in relation to the terms and conditions of the agreement.
The said dispute should be resolved through an arbitration, if amicable settlement fails. Admittedly, the petitioner issued dispute notice dated 25.4.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on 13.08.2025 vide Annexure-F.
9. Despite service of notice, the respondents did not reply to the arbitration notice. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause in the Franchisee Agreement vide -7- NC: 2026:KHC:7044 CMP No. 623 of 2025 HC-KAR Annexure-A and the dispute arose between the petitioner regarding the payment for the services rendered by the petitioner as the respondents did not pay the service charges. Thus, in view of the arbitration clause, the said dispute has to be resolved through an arbitrator. Thus, the petitioner has made out of the ground to refer the dispute to the arbitration. For the foregoing, the point is answered in affirmative.
10. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER i. The Civil miscellaneous petition is allowed.
ii. Sri. D.T. Puttarangaswamy, District Judge (Retired) is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondents in terms of clause 27 of franchisee agreement as -8- NC: 2026:KHC:7044 CMP No. 623 of 2025 HC-KAR per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the Rules.
iii. All contentions of the parties are kept open.
iv. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the learned arbitrator and the director of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru.
v. The Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy of the documents produced by the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same.
vi. Pending IA(s), if any, disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS CT:KHV