- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48328 CMP No. 653 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 653 OF 2025 BETWEEN: RHEA HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT 3RD FLOOR, EAST WING, RAHEJA TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560001. REP. HEREIN BY ITS REGIONAL HEAD OPERATIONS & AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR.MOHAN KUMAR B.S. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.SUSHANT VENKATESH PAI, ADVOCATE) AND: MR. MATHEW PUSHPARAJ AGED MAJOR, SON OF MR.JOSEPH PUSHPARAJ, RESIDING AT NO. 1/10, SHANTI NILAYAM, WIND TUNNEL ROAD, MURUGESH PALYA, VIMALAPURA, BANGALORE - 560017. …RESPONDENT THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT., PRAYING TO APPOINT HON'BLE SHRI VISHWANATH V. ANGADI, PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (RETD.) AS SOLE ARBITRATOR IN THE PRESENT MATTER AND REFER THE PARTIES TO ARBITRATION VIDE THE LEASE DEED DATED 29.07.2022 CLAUSE 13 AT ANNEXURE - A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48328 CMP No. 653 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: "(a) APPOINT Hon'ble Shri Vishwanath V. Angadi, Principal District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) as Sole Arbitrator in the present matter and refer the parties to arbitration vide the Lease Deed dated 29.07.2022 clause 13 at Annexure-A; (b) Grant such other / further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice and equity." 2. The petitioner and the respondent entered into a lease agreement dated 29.07.2022, contending that the same is governed by arbitration clause, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. Clause-13 of the lease deed, which is relied upon in this regard is reproduced herein under for easy reference: "13. DISPUTE RESOLUTION and GOVERNING LAW: 13.1 - If any dispute arising between the Parties is not amicably settled within fifteen (15) days of commencement of amicable attempts to settle the same, all disputes or differences or questions arising out of or in connection with or relating to this Lease Deed, or the breach, termination or invalidity hereof, shall be referred to Bangalore Court of Jurisdiction and Governing Law as - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48328 CMP No. 653 of 2025 well and the venue of arbitration shall be Bengaluru and the language of the proceeding shall be in English." 3. I am unable to agree with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid Clause-13 is an arbitration clause inasmuch as there is no particular agreement arrived at between the parties to refer the matter to arbitration and nor for the dispute between the parties to be adjudicated by way of arbitration. 4. A perusal of the aforesaid Clause-13 indicates that any disputes or differences or questions arising out of or in connection with or relating to this lease deed, or the breach, termination or invalidity hereof, shall be referred to Bangalore Court of jurisdiction and governing law as well and the venue of arbitration shall be Bengaluru. 5. Merely because the word 'arbitration' has been used in the said Clause would not render the same in arbitration clause when it is categorically stated that the dispute shall be referred to Bangalore Court of jurisdiction. That being the case, there is no categorical agreement arrived at between the parties to refer the matter to arbitration. Hence, the petition stands dismissed at the stage of admission - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48328 CMP No. 653 of 2025 reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate Court seeking for appropriate relief. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10