- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 359 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. DINESH KUMAR K S/O KISHAN LAL, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 2. SRI. RITESH KUMAR K, S/O KISHAN LAL, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.24, CAR STREET, HALASURU, BENGALURU - 560 008. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H.R. ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S WORKSHAALA SPACES PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT N.R. TOWER, 2ND FLOOR, 17TH CROSS ROAD, 19TH MAIN ROAD, SECTOR-4, HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 102. REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.26, ARPITH NAGAR, GANDIPATH, VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR - 302 021, Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 REPRESENTED BY. MANOJ KHANDEWAL CEO / AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY. …RESPONDENT (BY MS. KAVITHA DAMODARAN, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO A) APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS AS PER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN THE DEED OF LEASE DATED 15/01/2019 AND ALL THE MATTERS CONCERNING THE TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN THE PARTIES, VIDE ANNEXURE-A. CLAUSE AT PARA 18.3. 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 by the petitioners under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act, 1996’ for brevity) for the appointment of a Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes between the parties to the petition in terms of Clause 17 of the lease deed dated 15.01.2019 vide Annexure-A. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: The petitioners executed a lease deed in favour of the respondent for 9 years commencing on 15.01.2019 and the rent commenced on 16.04.2019. The lease deed was registered on 09.04.2019. The respondent did not pay the rent regularly and the respondent committed a default in payment of rent. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing a notice dated 07.06.2023. The said notice was served to the respondent. The respondent replied to the arbitration notice on 11.07.2023, stating that the letter dated 07.06.2023 is an unsigned letter and did not agree to the appointment of an arbitrator. Hence, this petition. 3. The respondent did not file the statement of objections. Hence, the statement of objections is taken as not filed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned counsel for the respondent. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent has committed default in payment of rent and the petitioners invoked an arbitration clause by issuing notice as per Annexure-B under Section 21 of the Act, proposed to appoint an arbitrator, and the respondent did not agree to refer the matter for the appointment of an arbitrator. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the petition. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits no objections to allow the petition. 7. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. The point that arises for consideration is as follows: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 “Whether the petitioner made out a ground to refer the dispute to the Arbitrator in terms of clause 17 of the Lease Deed dated 15.01.2019 vide Annexure-A as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules?” 9. There is no dispute regarding the execution of the registered lease deed between the parties to the petition on 15.01.2019. It is contended that the respondent, being the tenant, has failed to pay the rent regularly and committed a default. If any dispute arises between the parties to the petition, the said dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration in terms of Clause 17 of the lease deed dated 15.01.2019, which reads as follows: “17. DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND JURISDICTION:. 18.1 Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Lease Deed, the following provisions apply if any dispute or difference arises between the Parties arising out of or relating to this Lease Deed (the "Dispute"). 18.2 A Dispute will be deemed to arise when one Party serves on the other Party a notice stating the nature of the Dispute (a "Notice of Dispute"). The Parties hereto agree that they will - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 use all reasonable efforts to resolve any Disputes between themselves through negotiations. 18.3 In the case of failure by the Parties to resolve the Dispute in the manner set out above within 30 (Thirty) days from the date when the Notice of Dispute was issued, such Dispute shall be referred to a sole arbitrator mutually appointed by the Parties in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and any amendments thereto 18.4 All proceedings shall be conducted in English and a daily transcript in English shall be prepared. The venue of arbitration shall be Bangalore, Karnataka State, India and the decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the Parties.” 18.5 The laws of India shall be applicable to the Parties to all disputes arising out of this Lease Deed. Subject to the provisions with regard to disputes being settled by arbitration, Courts in Bangalore shall have exclusive jurisdiction with respect to all matters arising out of this Lease Deed.” 10. The petitioners invoked an arbitration clause and issued a notice as per Annexure-B, dated 07.06.2023, calling upon the respondent to resolve the dispute through arbitration. The respondent replied to the arbitration notice vide Annexure-D dated 11.07.2023, wherein the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 respondent contended that there is no arbitral dispute and the letter dated 07.06.2023 is unsigned letter. Hence, the question of invoking an arbitration clause for the appointment of an arbitrator does not arise. I have perused the arbitration clause, which discloses that if there is any dispute arises between the parties to the petition, the same shall be resolved through arbitration. Admittedly, the agreement provides an arbitration clause. Further, the petitioners also issued an arbitration notice vide Annexure-B. Hence, there is an arbitral dispute. The issue must be resolved through arbitration. Learned counsel for the respondent submits no objections to allow the petition. In view of the same, the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the matter to arbitration. Hence, I answer the point for consideration in the affirmative. 11. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23486 CMP No. 359 of 2023 ii. Hon’ble Justice Sri Javid Pasha, learned District Judge (Rtd.), is nominated as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 17 of the lease deed dated 15.01.2019 vide Annexure-A as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules. iii. The office is directed to communicate this order to the learned sole Arbitrator and the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru. In view of the dismissal of the appeal, the pending IA’s if any, does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB CT: BHK