- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 77 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. MR.V. NARAYANASWAMY, S/O LATE H G VENKATESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 2. SMT BHAGYAMMA, W/O MR V NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 3. SMT N VIJAYASHREE, D/O MR V NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 4. MR N VINAY, S/O MR V NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS PETITIONERS-2 TO 4 ARE REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER MR V NARAYANSWAMY, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF WARD NO 22, VARADAPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TOWN, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 114. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S.B. LAKSHMI, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 AND: 1. M/S. SUPRA INFRASTRUCTURES, NO. 38/1, SSD PARADISE APARTMENT, 10TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, KATHRIGUPPE, BSK, 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 085. REPRESENTED ITS PARTNERS: SRI. SRINIVASA MURTHY AND MR. JAYARAMA SHETTY 2. SRI SRINIVASA MURTHY R, S/O SRI RANAGSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, PARTNER-IN M/S. SUPRA INFRASTRUCTURES. 3. SRI S JAYARAMA SHETTY, S/O SRI BHOJA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, PARTNER-IN M/S. SUPRA INFRASTRUCTURES. AND ALSO R/AT “CHOWDESHWARI RESIDENCY” NO 3, 1ST MAIN, POORNAPRAGNA LAYOUT, BSK, 3RD STAGE, KATHRIGUPPE, BENGALURU - 85 AND ALSO BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO. G2, SAPTHAGIRI RESIDENCY, BDA MAIN ROAD, OLD HAL AIRPORT RAOD, MARUTHI NAGARA, CHENNAPPA LAYOUT, CHINNAPPANAHALLI, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 BENGALURU – 560 010. …RESPONDENTS (V/O DATED 29.04.2025 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 TO R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AND NOMINATE ONE ARBITRATOR FROM RESPONDENTS SIDE IN TERMS OF THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE- 20 OF THE REGISTERED JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED 27/08/2014 REGISTERED AS NO. HSK-1-03763-2014- 15, STORED IN CD NO. HSKD 465 OF BOOK-1 AT ANNEXURE-B FOR ADJUDICATING THE ARBITRAL DISPUTE THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS TO SERVE THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS THAT THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ABOVE PETITION TO MEET THE END OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (herein after referred ass, ‘the act’) for the appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of Arbitration Clause No.20 of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 registered Joint Development Agreement dated 27.08.2014, vide Annexure 'B'. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: Petitioner No.1 is the owner of the land bearing Sy.Nos.149/6, 157/1, 157/2 and 160 situated at Hosakote village, Kasaba Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District, having acquired under registered partition deed. The petitioners are the members of one family, executed the registered Joint Development Agreement dated 27.08.2014, as well as the General Power of Attorney dated 27.08.2014 in favour of respondents. The respondents have committed breach of agreement. The petitioners revoked the Joint Development Agreement and General Power of Attorney on 15.04.2016 by issuing a notice through paper publication in the Hindu and Udayavani Newspapers. As a dispute arouse between the parties, the petitioners invoked an Arbitration Clause by issuing a notice on 15.09.2023. The respondents did not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 reply to the notice and same has been returned unserved with the postal shara. Hence, this petition. 3. The petitioners served the notice to the respondents by way of paper publication. Despite paper publication, respondent Nos.1 to 3 remained unrepresented. 4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that dispute arouse between the petitioners and respondents regarding the terms and conditions of the Joint Development Agreement. She submits that the petitioners have revoked the registered Joint Development Agreement and the General Power of Attorney. Hence, she submits that the dispute between the petitioners and respondents has to be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioners issued arbitration notice on 15.09.2023, proposing the name of an arbitrator. The respondents did not reply to the arbitration notice. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is an arbitration clause in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 the Joint Development Agreement. Hence prays to allow the petition. 5. I have perused the records and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners. 6. The point, that arises for consideration is as follows; "Whether the petitioners has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator for adjudication of the dispute between the parties to the petition, in terms of Clause 20 of the Joint Development Agreement dated 27.08.2014 and as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996." 7. There is no dispute regarding the execution of the registered Joint Development Agreement between parties to the petition on 27.08.2014. The respondents committed a breach of the said agreement. The petitioners invoked an arbitration clause which reads as follows, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 “20. Arbitration “In the event of any disputes between the parties hereto relating to the matters mentioned above, the same shall be resolved through Arbitration as per the provisions of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 and the statutory modifications thereof, by appointment of one Arbitrator by the OWNERS and one by the DEVELOPERS and an Umpire if necessary. The Arbitration proceeding shall be conducted at Bangalore on the date, time and place as decided by the Arbitrator/s so appointed for this purpose.” 8. The petitioners invoked the arbitration clause by issuing notice dated 15.09.2023 proposing the name of an arbitrator. The respondents did not respond to the arbitration notice. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause in the Joint Development Agreement and the dispute arouse between the parties have to be resolved through the arbitration. The petitioners have made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator. In view of the above discussion, I answer the point for consideration in the affirmative. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21645 CMP No. 77 of 2024 9. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. (ii) Learned Sri.N.N.Dharwadkar (Retd. District Judge) is nominated as the Sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute arisen between the parties to the petition as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. (iii) The Office is directed to communicate and forward the copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator, and the Arbitration and Conciliation Center, Bengaluru. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16