- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 446 OF 2024 BETWEEN: M/S SUN MOBILITY PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.25, DODDANEKUNDI INDUSTRIAL AREA, MAHADEVPURA POST, WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 048 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND CO-FOUNDER MR. CHETAN MAINI …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANIKETH B C., ADVOCATE) AND: GOZIPP AVIATION PRIVATE LIMITED B-46, GROUND FLOOR, SEC 57, NOIDA, 201 301 REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO, AND CO-FOUNDER MR. NARENDRA JHA …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MILASH ARROL, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6)) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO EXERCISE THE POWERS UNDER SECTION 11 (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AND APPOINT JUSTICE ASHOK BANGREPPA HINCHIGERI (RETD.) TO ADJUDICATE THE ON-GOING DISPUTES WHICH HAS ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT BY VIRTUE OF CLAUSE 14 (B) OF THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE MOBILITY AGREEMENT DATED 06.03.2023 (ANNEXURE-A) Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 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 (the Act, 1996’ for brevity) seeking for the appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute arisen between the parties in terms of clause 14(b) of the Electric Vehicle Mobility Agreement dated 06.03.2023 vide Annexure-A as per the provisions of the Act, 1996. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: The CEO and founder of the respondent company approached the petitioner to avail of services in January 2023. On 06.03.2023, an Electric Vehicle Mobility Agreement was entered between the petitioner and the respondent. The respondent started availing of the services of the petitioner. The petitioner sent an email on - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 09.07.2023 to the respondent, calling upon the respondent to clear the outstanding dues. 3. The respondent replied to the email on 13.07.2023, taking up untenable contentions. The respondent issued an email requesting that keyfobs be enabled and informed that the outstanding dues would be cleared by 11.12.2023. However, the respondents failed to make any payments. The petitioner issued a termination notice on 27.02.2024 and called upon the respondent to inter alia clear the outstanding dues. The respondent replied to the legal notice on 05.03.2024. After receiving the reply to the notice from the respondent, the petitioner issued an arbitration notice under Section 21 of the Act, 1996, on 18.03.2024 proposing the name of an arbitrator. The respondent failed to issue any response/consent to the appointment of an Arbitrator. Further, petitioner issued a notice dated 28.03.2024, calling upon respondent to return 310 EVs supplied to them and they failed to return remaining 40 EVs. Therefore, the petitioner - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 approached the learned City Civil Court, (Commercial), Bengaluru, and filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in Com.A.A.231/2024. Hence, the petitioner is constrained to file this petition, for the appointment of a sole Arbitrator. 4. The respondent filed a statement of objections contending that there is no such agreement executed between the petitioner and respondent and no arbitration clause exists in the agreement. Hence, he prays to dismiss the petition. 5. Heard the arguments of Sri. Aniketh B.C., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Milash Arrol, learned counsel for the respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Electric Vehicle Mobility Agreement was executed between the petitioner and respondent on 06.03.2023. Pursuant to the agreement, the respondent availed the services of the petitioner. The respondent did not paid the outstanding dues to the petitioner. He submits that the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 petitioner issued a demand notice for the respondent to clear the outstanding dues. The respondent replied to the legal notice on untenable grounds. He submits that after receipt of the reply notice, the petitioner issued an arbitration notice under Section 21 of the Act, 1996. He submits that the respondent did not accept the proposal to nominate an Arbitrator. He submits that there is an arbitration clause in Annexure-A. Hence, he prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that though the respondent has filed objections, he has not objected to nominate Hon’ble justice Sri. Ashok B. Hinchigeri, Former Judge, the High Court of Karnataka, as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute arises between the parties to the petition. 8. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 9. The point that arises for consideration is as follows: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 “Whether the petitioner has made out any grounds to refer the dispute to the Arbitrator in terms of clause 14(b) of the Electrical Vehicle Mobility Agreement dated 06.03.2023, as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” 10. It is not in dispute that the petitioner and respondent have entered into an Electric Vehicle Mobility Agreement on 06.03.2023. Under the agreement, the respondent availed the petitioner’s services. The petitioner sent an email to the respondent to clear the outstanding dues on 09.07.2023. The respondent instead of clearing the outstanding dues, has replied to the email on 13.07.2023. The petitioner, having fed up with the delaying attitude of the respondent, terminated the Electric Vehicle Mobility Agreement, by issuing a termination notice on 27.02.2024. Thereafter, the respondent replied to the notice taking untenable contentions. The petitioner invoked the Arbitration clause in the Electric Vehicle Mobility Agreement dated - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 06.03.2023, which provides for an arbitration Clause 14(b) of the Agreement dated 06.03.2023, reads as follows: 14.(b) Arbitration and Jurisdiction: All disputes, differences, claims and demands arising under or pursuant to or concerning this Agreement shall be referred to Arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory amendment or re-amendment or re-enactment thereof, subject to following rules: a) Arbitration shall be conducted by a sole arbitrator to be appointed mutually by the parties. b) The language of arbitration shall be English, and place of arbitration shall be Bangalore. c) The respective costs of arbitration shall be borne equally by the parties in the first instance; however, the successful party shall be entitled to the costs of arbitration including legal and recovery costs. d) The arbitrator to be appointed hereunder shall either be a retired judge having held a position not lower than that of Additional District Judge or an advocate recognised by the Bar Council of India, having an experience of not less than 10 years in practice. e) The award shall be a speaking award and shall be binding on the parties. 11. As a dispute has arisen between the petitioner and the respondent regarding the outstanding dues, - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 admittedly, there is an arbitration clause. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing notice under Section 21 of the Act. However, said dispute has to be resolved through the Arbitration. Learned counsel for the respondent submits no objection to appoint an Arbitrator. In view of the above discussion, I answer the point for consideration in the affirmative. 12. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. ii. Hon’ble Justice Sri. John Michael Cunha, Former Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, is nominated as a sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition, as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Rules. iii. The office is directed to communicate this order to the learned sole Arbitrator and the Arbitration and Conciliation Center, Bengaluru. iv. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Page No.8 is retyped and replaced vide Court order dated 03.06.2025 - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:16121 CMP No. 446 of 2024 In view of the disposal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2024 does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS