- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5658 CMP No. 491 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 491 OF 2023 BETWEEN: GIRISH T.K. SON OF (LATE) KRISHNAPPA T.H AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.123/A, 5TH MAIN, 3RD STAGE, 2ND BLOCK, NEAR CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL, BASAVESHWARNAGAR BENGALURU - 560 069. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABHINAY Y.T, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. H R COMBINES A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT J-118, 4TH FLOOR, 1ST MAIN, 10TH CROSS, L N PURAM SRIRAMPURAM, NEAR BANDIREDDY CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 021. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES HANUMANTH NAGENDRA RAO AND MUKESH KUMAR JAIN. Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5658 CMP No. 491 of 2023 2. HANUMANTH NAGENDRA RAO S/O NAGENDRA RAO AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, AND RESIDING AT H-99, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, NAGAPPA BLOCK, L N PURAM BENGALURU - 560 021. 3. PRAKASH CHAND KAKARIYA SON OF BHARHULALJI KAKARIYA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, AND RESIDING AT NO.2, SRI APARTMENTS, I FLOOR, 2ND K V LANE, COTTONPET CROSS BENGALURU - 560 053. 4. MUKESH KUMAR JAIN SON OF KANTILAL AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, AND RESIDING AT NO.204/1, 3RD FLOOR, AS CHAR STREET, MASJID, CHIKKAPET, BENGALURU - 560 053. 5. M/S SHASHANK CINEMAS A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.115, 6TH MAIN ROAD, II STAGE, II PHASE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BENGALURU - 560 086, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHASHANK. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.D.N. PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6; SMT. G.K. BHAVANA, ADVOCATE FOR R5) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5658 CMP No. 491 of 2023 THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 R/W CLAUSE 2 OF THE APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT SCHEME, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO HEAR AND DECIDE THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS PURSUANT TO ARBITRATION CLAUSE 15 OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 25TH JUNE 2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CLAUSE 16 OF MOU DATED 5TH APRIL 2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-C ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PARTIES, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 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 sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute and difference between the parties in terms of Partition Deed dated 05th April 2019. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5658 CMP No. 491 of 2023 2. Respondent-firm, by its partners-Respondent Nos.2 to 4, have tendered appearance and Respondent No.5 has also tendered appearance and have engaged the lawyer. 3. The petitioner contends that, based on the partnership deed dated 25.06.2018 and the memorandum of understanding executed between Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.5, an arbitration clause is incorporated under Clause 15 of the partnership deed and Clause 16 of the memorandum of understanding. The petitioner alleges that Respondents 2 to 4 have engaged in independent transactions with Respondent No.5 in violation of the terms and conditions set forth in the memorandum of understanding. Consequently, the petitioner seeks dissolution of the partnership firm and claims a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from Respondent No.5, along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum and damages. In response, Respondents 1 to 4 oppose the petition, arguing that the petitioner has failed to acknowledge the financial losses incurred by the firm. They further contend that, even - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5658 CMP No. 491 of 2023 under the petitioner’s claim, he is liable to contribute towards the firm’s losses, which amount to Rs.13,70,710/-. Meanwhile, Respondent No.5 contests the petition on the ground that the dispute between the firm and its partners is distinct from any claims involving Respondent No.5, and therefore, these separate disputes cannot be adjudicated together through arbitration. 4. Counsel for Respondent No.5 further asserts that multiple transactions have taken place between the firm and its partners, and Respondent No.5 has been involved in independent dealings with Respondents 2 to 4. It is argued that such matters fall outside the scope of arbitration. 5. This court is not inclined to accede to the contentions canvassed by respondents. The Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court, in a series of judgments, have consistently held that once a party invokes Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to resolve inter se disputes involving complex issues, objections raised by the respondents must - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5658 CMP No. 491 of 2023 be left for the Arbitrator’s determination. Given the nature of the disputes between Respondents 1 to 4 and Respondent No.5, adjudication by an Arbitrator is necessary. Accordingly, this Court, while leaving all disputed issues and contentions raised in the petition to be decided by the Arbitrator, is satisfied with the existence of a valid arbitration clause. Furthermore, this Court finds that the parties have complied with the requirements under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 6. In the light of the aforesaid arbitration clause and contentions advanced by the petitioner, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed appointing Sri.S.R.Somashekara, Former Retired District and Sessions Judge as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5658 CMP No. 491 of 2023 conduct proceedings 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) The Office is directed to communicate this order to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre and to Sri.S.R.Somashekara, Former Retired District and Sessions Judge, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE BNV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 18 CT: BHK