- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37188 WP No. 28319 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 28319 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 1, GOLF AVENUE, KODIHALLI, ADJOINING (KGA) GOLF COURSE, AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE 560 008. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, MR. AMIT JAISWAL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.ARUN KUMAR., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR MS. VYBHAVASHREE S., ADVOCATE) AND: ROCK REALTY PVT. LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT A/6, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37188 WP No. 28319 of 2025 HERMES PARK SOCIETY, 30 BUND GARDEN ROAD, PUNE 411 001, REPRESENTED BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTORS. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.AMAN VIJAY DUTTA, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 21.08.2025 PASSED BY THE XXXVIII ADDI. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE IN A.P. NO. 54/2024 (ANNEXURE-E1); B. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 03.09.2025 PASSED BY THE XXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE IN A.P. NO. 54/2024 (ANNEXURE-E2) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37188 WP No. 28319 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner, whose claim for specific performance of an agreement in an arbitral proceeding, is rejected by the sole arbitrator by the award dated 10.09.2024 with certain reliefs being granted is before this Court. The petitioner has called in question such award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [for short, 'the Arbitration Act'] in A.P. No.54/2024 with the XXXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore [for short, ‘the civil Court’] 2. It is now brought on record that the respondent has also called this award in question under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act but in another proceeding before a commercial Court being aggrieved by certain directions and that both the petitioner and the respondent have filed their corresponding applications in their respective - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37188 WP No. 28319 of 2025 proceedings calling in question the jurisdiction of the civil/commercial Courts. The petitioner has also applied for transfer of these two petitions under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the respondent is contesting this application. 3. Sri Arun Kumar, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, submits that though the petitioner has impugned certain orders of the civil Court in A.P. No.54/2024, he would request this Court to dispose of the petition with directions to the civil Court to decide the pending application for stay of the award emphasizing that after 10.09.2025, the petitioner cannot insist on a right to continue in the premises until and unless there is a stay. 4. Sri Aman Vijay Dutta, the learned counsel who is permitted to enter his appearance for the respondent while not disputing the essential facts as stated above proposes to oppose the request for direction to the civil Court contending that it may not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37188 WP No. 28319 of 2025 be within the civil Court's jurisdiction to consider an application for a stay of the arbitral award when its very jurisdiction has been put in controversy with an application by the respondent. However when queried, the learned counsel is categorical that the petition could indeed be disposed of calling upon the civil Court to decide the pending application for Stay in A.P. No.54/2024 expeditiously but with the clarification that it should be open to the respondent to contest such application, amongst others, on the ground that the civil Court cannot entertain such application. 5. This narrows down the controversy for the present petition, and this Court is inclined to dispose of the petition calling upon the civil Court to dispose of the pending application for stay in A.P. No.54/2024 subject to the parties cooperating and its board expeditiously. This Court, while so disposing of this petition, must also observe that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37188 WP No. 28319 of 2025 respondent must be at liberty to contest the application on all grounds including the maintainability of the application when the jurisdiction is in question. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-