- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23734 RP No. 244 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REVIEW PETITION NO. 244 OF 2025 BETWEEN: MS. REETHIKA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, D/O Y UMANATH SHETTY, R/ AT FLAT NO. 402, B BLOCK, SPRINGFIELD APARTMENTS, SARJAPURA ROAD, AMBALIPURA, BANGALORE – 560 102 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMPATH ANAND SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ADITYA N RAI AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI NARAYANA THIMAPPA RAI, RESIDING AT POUND GARDEN, KADRI ROAD, MANGALORE-575 003 DK DISTRICT 2. MR ASHWIN SHETTY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SO Y UMANATH SHETTY, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 904, PLANET SKS APARTMENT, KADRI HILLS, MANGALURU 575 004 Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23734 RP No. 244 of 2025 3. MRS NISHALI A SHETTY @NISHALI N RAI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, W/O ASHWIN SHETTY, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 904, PLANET SKS APARTMENT, KADRI HILLS, MANGALURU 575 004 4. CERA SANITARYWARE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. JAGADEESAN MARIMUTHU, (DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER HR AND ADMINISTRATION) OFFICE AT 7TH AND 8TH FLOOR, B-WING, PRIVILON AMBLI BRTS ROAD, ISCKON CROSS ROAD, AHMEDABAD - 380 059 GUJARAT 5. M/S AXIS INFINITY A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INDIA PARTNERSHIP ACT, AXIS PADEGAL, 4TH FLOOR, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 555, 9TH CROSS ROAD, 3RD PHASE, JP NAGAR, NEAR SONY CENTRE, BANGALORE - 560 078 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS REVIEW PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 R/W SEC. 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW AND RECALL THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2025 PASSED BY THE CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 424/2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY WITHDRAW THE APPOINTMENT OF THE SOLE ARBITRATOR NAMELY, HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. A.N. VENUGOPAL GOWDA, FORMER JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT UNDER THE PROVISION CONTAINED - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23734 RP No. 244 of 2025 UNDER SEC. 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AS AMENDED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER 1. This Review Petition is filed by respondent No.3 in C.M.P. No.424 of 2024 seeking to review and recall the order dated 16.04.2025 passed by this Court in C.M.P. No.424 of 2024, by which this Court allowed the Civil Miscellaneous Petition nominating an arbitrator. 2. The order under review is mainly on the ground that this Court, while passing the order, noted the fact that respondent No.1 (petitioner in the CMP) had called upon respondent No.2 herein to distribute the rental amount collected by him and not to lease out the ground floor of the said building without concurrence. It is contended that while passing the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23734 RP No. 244 of 2025 impugned order, this Court construed the contentions of the petitioner as an arbitral dispute, whereas there is no arbitral dispute that requires arbitration between the parties. In view of the same, it is contended that the Court was misled by the petitioner in the Civil Miscellaneous Petition. As such, there is an error apparent on the face of the record. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the petition. 3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for both parties. 4. Respondent No.1 herein filed a petition in Civil Miscellaneous Petition No.424 of 2024. This Court issued a notice to the respondents therein and the notice was served on them. However, despite service of notice, the respondents therein remained unrepresented, and as such, they were placed ex parte. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23734 RP No. 244 of 2025 5. This Court, while passing the order, considered the registered lease agreement dated 22.12.2022 executed between the parties to the petition, and also the notice issued by the petitioner therein calling upon respondent No.2 herein to distribute the rental amount collected by him and requested the respondents not to lease out the ground floor of the said building, and also the fact that petitioner therein, filed a suit, for partition and accounts in O.S. No.5620 of 2024 on the file of the City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, which was pending for consideration. 6. It was also observed that, the petitioner therein invoked the arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice dated 10.06.2024. The respondents replied to the arbitration notice, admitting the execution of the registered sale agreement, but rejected the request for the settlement of the dispute by arbitration. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23734 RP No. 244 of 2025 7. Considering the arbitration clause, the arbitration notice, and reply to the arbitration notice, this Court allowed the petition, and nominated the learned arbitrator. The review petitioner had the liberty to put forth her claim in the Civil Miscellaneous Petition; however, despite the service of a notice, the review petitioner remained unrepresented. Ultimately, this Court, considering the entire material on record, allowed the petition. 8. The learned counsel for the review petitioner was not able to point out any error apparent on the face of the record in the impugned order. 9. Accordingly, I do not find any error apparent on the face of the record in the impugned order. 10. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Review Petition is dismissed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23734 RP No. 244 of 2025 (ii) In view of the dismissal of the review petition, I.A. No.2 of 2025 do not arise for consideration, and the same is accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39