Karnataka High Court
M/S. Mac Charles ( I ) Ltd., vs M/S. Trishul Developers on 5 April, 2019
Author: Alok Aradhe
Bench: Alok Aradhe
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.187 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
M/S. MAC CHARLES (I) LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT P.B.NO.174, NO.28, SANKEY ROAD
BANGALORE-560 052.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
VICE PRESIDENT FINANCE
AND COMPANY SECRETARY:
MR. M.S. REDDY
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
S/O. SRI M. BASI REDDY. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SATYANAND B.S., ADV.)
AND:
1. M/S. TRISHUL DEVELOPERS
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.109-B
MITTAL TOWERS, NO.6, M.G. ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001.
DULY REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT
NOS. 2 TO 5, BEING ITS PARTNERS.
2. MR. NIRAJ MITTAL
S/O. MR. O.P. MITTAL
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.
2
3. MR. O.P. MITTAL
S/O. LATE MALIRAM MITTAL
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS.
4. MRS. UMA MITTAL
W/O. MR. O.P. MITTAL
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.
5. MRS. JYOTHI MITTAL
W/O. MR. NIRAJ MITTAL
ALL RESIDING AT NO.94D
MITTAL NIVAS, 9TH CROSS ROAD
RMV EXTENSION
BANGALORE-560 080. ...RESPONDENTS
(R1, R2, R3, R4 AND R5 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 11(5) & (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION
ACT 1996, PRAYING TO 1. APPOINT ANY COMPETENT PERSON
AS AN ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE DISPUTE
ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT
COMPANY AS STIPULATED UNDER CLAUSE 6, OF THE LOAN
AGREEMENT DATED: 11.08.2015 ANNEXUE-B AND CLAUSE 9,
OF THE DEED OF GUARANTEE DATED: 11.08.2015
ANNEXURE-C. 2. GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS DEEMED
FIT BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri Satyanand B.S., learned counsel for petitioner. None appear for the respondents though served.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing and the same is heard finally.
3
3. By means of this petition under Sections 11(5) and 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act', for short), the petitioner inter alia seeks appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
4. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner at length and perused the records.
5. From perusal of the records, it is evident that the parties have entered into a Loan Agreement on 11.08.2015. Admittedly, Clause-6 of the aforesaid agreement contains an arbitration clause. The dispute between the parties has arisen and the petitioner has sent a notice to the respondents on 08.08.2017 invoking the arbitration clause. However, no response was received from the respondents. In the aforesaid factual background, petitioner has approached this Court seeking appointment of an arbitrator. 4
6. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and bearing in mind the mandate contained in Section 11(6-A) of the Act as well as the fact that the parties had entered into an agreement and the agreement, admittedly, contains an arbitration clause and the dispute between the parties has arisen with regard to the aforesaid agreement, I deem it appropriate to appoint Sri Ashok L. Pujar, retired District and Sessions Judge, as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
7. 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 5 with law and the Rules governing the Arbitration Centre.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE ST