- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3276 CMP No. 251 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 251 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SRI. S.P. HOMBANNA S/O S.J. PADMARAJ AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 507/5 UPPER PALACE ORCHARDS, 9TH CROSS, SANKEY TANK, SADASHIVANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 080. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.N. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S UNISHIRE HOMES LLP REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. PRATIK K. MEHTA HAVING THEIR REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.42, CASTLE STREET, ASHOK NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 025. EMAIL: accounts@unishire .com 2. M/S S.A.ENTERPRISES, REPRESENTED BY MR. ABDUL LATEEF JABBAR, HAVING THEIR REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.29, 15TH CROSS, KANAKA NAGAR, R.T.NAGAR, BANGALORE-560032. 3. MR. KOUSHIK MUKUNDRAI PUROHIT S/O MUKUNDRAI DAYALAL PUROHIT RESIDING AT APT NO.K2-1114, Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3276 CMP No. 251 of 2024 11TH FLOOR, I BLOCK, UNISHIRE TERRAZA ARARTMENT, CORPORATION NO.63/1/78, THANISANDRA, K.R.PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE-560077. 4. MRS. MANSI J. MODH W/O KOUSHIK MUKUNDRAI PUROHIT RESIDING AT APT NO.K2-1114, 11TH FLOOR, I BLOCK, UNISHIRE TERRAZA ARARTMENT, CORPORATION NO.63/1/78, THANISANDRA, K.R.PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE-560077. (RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 4 ARE DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 09.07.2024) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S VENKAT SUBBA RAO, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 2015, PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER BY APPOINTING AN ARBITRATOR AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3276 CMP No. 251 of 2024 ORAL ORDER This civil miscellaneous petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute and difference between the parties in terms of memorandum of sale agreement dated 18.08.2015 evidenced at Annexure-A. 2. After receipt of notice, respondent has tendered appearance through learned counsel. 3. The petitioner asserts that he entered into an agreement of sale with the respondent for the purchase of a flat identified as Flat No.K2-1114, situated in Block No. 1, on the 11th floor of the property known as 'Unishire Terezza'. According to the petitioner, the agreement was executed and registered on 18.08.2015 and 19.10.2015, respectively, and the total sale consideration agreed upon was Rs.1,09,65,871/-. The petitioner claims that the entire sale consideration has been paid to the respondent - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3276 CMP No. 251 of 2024 in compliance with the terms of the agreement. However, despite fulfilling his financial obligations under the contract, the petitioner alleges that the respondent has failed to perform his part of the agreement, specifically in delivering possession of the flat. Consequently, the petitioner issued a notice invoking the arbitration clause contained in the agreement, seeking resolution of the dispute through arbitration. 4. The respondent, opposing the petition, contends that the agreement of sale, prima facie, does not reflect the payment of the sale consideration. Relying on the legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case addressing the interplay between arbitration agreements under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the Stamp Act, 1899, the respondent argues that the agreement is void and unenforceable. It is further contended that the absence of evidence regarding the payment of the sale consideration - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3276 CMP No. 251 of 2024 renders the agreement invalid, thereby disentitling the petitioner from invoking the arbitration clause. 5. After thorough review of the petition, annexures and supporting documents, this Court is satisfied that petitioner has met the procedural requirement outlined under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The objections raised by the respondent including non-payment of sale consideration which would render the document void requires to be examined by the Arbitrator. 6. In the light of the aforesaid clause of arbitration and contentions advanced by both the parties, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed appointing Sri. Ajit J.Gunjal, Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents and conduct proceeding at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru according to the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3276 CMP No. 251 of 2024 (ii) All contentions inter se parties are left open for adjudication in the arbitration proceedings; (iii) Office is directed to communicate this order to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre and to Sri. Ajit J.Gunjal, Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 3 Sl No.: 57