- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 50 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. MR ABDUL GAFAR SOLANKI, S/O NIZAMUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S ALWEL WATERPROOFING COMPANY, SOLANKI, HAVING THE OFFICE AT NO 19/58 ALMIDRAR 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS, MARUTHI NAGAR, MADIWALA, BANGALORE - 560 068. 2. MR IMRAN KHAN SOLANKI S/O ABDUL GAFFAR SOLANKI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S ALWIN CONSTRUCTIONS, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.19/58 ALMIDRAR, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS, MARUTHI NAGAR, MADIWALA, BANGALORE - 560 068. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI HARIPRASAD M S, ADVOCATE FOR SRI GIRIDHAR S V, ADVOCATE) AND: BREN CORPORATION, A PROPREITERSHIP CONCERN HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.61, BREN BALAVANA, KORAMANGALA, 5TH A BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 095, REP. BY PROPRIETOR MR BOOPESH REDDY, AND ALSO AT THE FOLLOWING ADDRESSES: Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 1, SJR PRIMUS, 8TH FLOOR, KORAMANGALA, 7TH BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560095, 4TH FLOOR, NO.3, PRESTIGE STERLING SQUARE, MADRAS BANK ROAD, BANGALORE KARNATAKA - 560001, 27, LAVELLE ROAD, D'SOUZA LAYOUT, ASHOK NAGAR, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA - 560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI AJAY SHANKAR, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO: (a) DIRECT THE APPOINTMENT OF A SOLE ARBITRATOR IN SRI VEERANNA G TIGADI, FORMER DISTRICT JUDGE. IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 16/CLAUSE 18/CLAUSE 19, SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES AND JURISDICTION OF THE PURCHASE ORDERS AS AT ANNEXURE-A, DATED 10.12.2019, ANNEXURE-A1 DATED 23.12.2019, ANNEXURE-A2 DATED 10.12.2019, ANNEXURE-A3 DATED 10.10.2017, ANNEXURE-A4 DATED: 20.07.2016, ANNEXURE-A5 DATED 22.08.2015, ANNEXURE-A6 DATED 23.05.2014, ANNEXURE-A7 DATED 16.05.2014, ANNEXURE-A8 27.03.2014, ANNEXURE-A9 DATED 09.12.2013, ANNEXURE- A10 DATED 04.09.2013, ANNEXURE-A11 DATED 24.05.2013 ANNEXURE-A12 DATED 21.12.2010 ANNEXURE-A13 DATED 30.07.2018, ANNEXURE-A14 DATED 02.08.2018 ANNEXURE- A15 DATED 10.02.2016, ANNEXURE-A16 DATED 13.09.2017, ANNEXURE-A17 DATED 16.11.2015, ANNEXURE-A18 DATED 19.12.2014, ANNEXURE-A19 DATED 30.06.2015, ANNEXURE- A20 DATED 08.04.2015, ANNEXURE-A21 DATED 19.07.2014. TO ENTER UPON REFERENCE AND TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS AND THE RESPONDENT IN TERMS OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 19.07.2023 AS AT ANNEXURE-C AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'Act of 1996') for the appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute arising between the petitioners and the respondent in terms of Clause 16/Clause 18/Clause 19- of the purchase orders as at Annexures- A to A21. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: Petitioners are related to each other as father and son and are carrying on the business as proprietors. The petitioners are carrying on the business of waterproofing of the construction being put up by the respondent based on the purchase order issued by the respondent. All the payments as against the invoices raised by the petitioners are paid, and interchangeably, all the payments by the respondent represent a portion of total liabilities due to the petitioners. Petitioner No.1, pursuant to the purchase orders, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 provided services to the respondent with a total value of Rs.2,08,84,492.02/- where petitioner No.2 provided services of the value to the tune of Rs.3,32,60,009.40/- cumulatively for a value of Rs.6,20,64,501.42/-. It is contended that the liabilities incurred on the invoices above were paid to the petitioners by way of negotiable instruments, transfer, and adjustments towards immoveable property as against the value of the property. In terms of such adjustments and payments, the respondent paid a sum of Rs.2,62,43,669.55/- to petitioner No.1 and a sum of Rs.2,61,63,538.70/- to petitioner No.2. Upon the payment of such amount, the respondent is due to the petitioners for a cumulative sum of Rs.96,57,293.17/- as on 12.08.2021. The petitioners requested the respondent to pay the outstanding dues. The respondent failed and neglected to pay the amount due. It is contended that the respondent had the benefit of services provided by the petitioners and has sold the apartments while corresponding, depriving the petitioners of the amount that the respondent is legitimately due. The petitioners are entitled to demand the said amount - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 and interest @ 18% per annum. The respondent is cumulative due as on 11.08.2023 for a sum of Rs.1,31,33,918.54/- rounded off to Rs.1,31,34,000/- 3. It is contended that by the various purchase orders, Clauses 16, 18 and 19, all the disputes should be referred to and be settled by the Arbitration. The petitioners issued a demand notice dated 19.07.2023 in accordance with Section 21 of the Act of 1996 through their counsel to the respondent demanding to pay a sum of Rs.1,31,34,000/-, failing which the same would be a dispute which is arbitral in accordance with clauses 16, 18 & 19 of the purchase orders. It is contended that the respondent neither paid any amount nor concurred with the appointment of an Arbitrator. Hence, a cause of action arises, and the petitioners are constrained to file a petition for the appointment of an Arbitrator. 4. The respondent filed statement of objections, and has raised several contentions on the merits of the case. However, the respondent has not denied the Arbitration Clauses in the purchase orders. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is an Arbitration Clause in the work orders i.e., Clauses 16, 18 and 19. Now, a dispute has arisen between the petitioners and the respondent. The dispute has to be resolved through an Arbitration. He submits that any retired District Judge be nominated as Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioners and the respondent and prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent though they filed a statement of objection, submits no objection to allow the petition. 8. Perused the records. The point that arises for my consideration is as follows: Whether the petitioners made out a ground to refer the dispute to the Arbitrator in terms of Clauses 16, 18 and 19 of various purchase orders as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996? - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 9. There is no dispute that the petitioners have provided services to the respondent, and the liability incurred on the invoices was paid to the petitioners by way of negotiable instruments, transfers and by way of adjustments towards immovable properties as against the value of the property. After paying the portion of the outstanding dues, the respondent is liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,31,33,918.54/-. The petitioners demanded payment of the outstanding dues, and the respondent neither replied to the demand notice nor complied with the terms of the legal notice. 10. Perused the purchase orders, which discloses the existence of an Arbitration Clause for the dispute/differences arising out of the purchase order to be referred to the Arbitrator. Admittedly, there is an Arbitration Clause. The dispute has arisen between the petitioners and the respondent, and the dispute has to be resolved by an Arbitration. 11. In view of the above discussion, I answer point for consideration in the affirmative. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:15496 CMP No. 50 of 2024 ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. (ii) Sri.Veeranna G.Tigadi, retired District Judge, is nominated as Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. (iii) The Office is directed to communicate this order to the learned Arbitrator and to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru. (iv) All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10