- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2041 CMP No. 445 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 445 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. TUSHAR PIPLANI S/O VISHAMBHARLAL AGED 43 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 8 K.K. KUNJ, 15 NEW CIVIL LINE BAREILLY - 243 005. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VINITHA .P.C, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S EXPAT PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED 2ND FLOOR, SHOBHA PEARL NO.1, COMMISSARIATE ROAD BANGALORE - 560 025. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES MR. BERLIN D'SOUZA AND FIROZ SHAH. PRESENTLY AT CARLTON TOWER A WING, 3RD FLOOR NO.1, OLD AIRPORT ROAD BANGALORE-560 008. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. UDAY SHANKAR .R, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2041 CMP No. 445 of 2023 THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 25 OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 22.07.2014 AT ANNEXURE-A, ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute and difference between the parties in terms of the agreement dated 22.07.2014. 2. The respondent, a developer, entered into an agreement with the landowners. Subsequently, the respondent also executed agreements with prospective purchasers for the sale of plots within the said project. The petitioner asserts that he has paid the entire sale consideration of Rs.7,00,000/- to the respondent. Despite receiving the full payment, the petitioner alleges that the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2041 CMP No. 445 of 2023 respondent has failed to fulfill his contractual obligations. The petitioner states that repeated requests were made via email and WhatsApp messages, followed by a formal notice. The respondent, while not replying to the notice, expressed a willingness for an amicable settlement. 3. Upon the respondent’s failure to act, the petitioner filed a civil miscellaneous petition, CMP No. 499/2021, seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator by invoking the arbitration clause. A coordinate Bench dismissed the petition on the ground that the notice sent by the petitioner did not comply with Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). However, the petitioner was granted liberty to rectify the issue, and the petition was disposed of accordingly. In compliance, the petitioner issued a fresh notice on 21.09.2023, invoking the arbitration clause and proposing the name of an Arbitrator. 4. Upon receiving the notice, the respondent engaged legal counsel and tendered an appearance. The - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2041 CMP No. 445 of 2023 respondent filed objections contesting the petition primarily on the grounds that it is ex-facie barred by limitation and that there is no valid proof of delivery of the notice, a mandatory requirement under Section 21 of the Act. 5. This Court has carefully reviewed the annexures filed with the civil miscellaneous petition. While the respondent does not dispute the existence of an arbitration clause within the agreement, the objections raised pertain to the alleged time-barred nature of the petition and the lack of due service of notice under Section 21 of the Act. The Court is of the view that, as established by several judgments, these crucial issues require examination by the Arbitrator. 6. After thorough scrutiny of the annexures accompanying the petition, the Court is satisfied that the petitioner has complied with the procedural requirements as stipulated under Section 11(4) of the Act. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2041 CMP No. 445 of 2023 7. At this juncture, counsel for the respondent has raised objections to the Arbitrator’s name suggested in the legal notice. 8. In the light of the aforesaid arbitration clause and the contentions advanced by the petitioner, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed appointing Sri D. Vishweshwara Bhat, Retired District Judge as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent and conduct proceeding at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru according to the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre. (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 D.Vishweshwara Bhat, Retired District - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2041 CMP No. 445 of 2023 Judge, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31