- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7924 CMP No. 404 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO.404 OF 2024 BETWEEN: GARAGEPRENEURS INTERNET PRIVATE LIMITED PRESENTLY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT INDIQUBE ASHFORD PARK VIEW, FIRST FLOOR, MUNICIPAL NO.9, 80 FEET ROAD, INDUSTRIAL LAYOUT, KORAMANGALA 3RD BLOCK, WARD NO.68, BENGALURU - 560 034. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. RAGHAVENDRA G. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHUJATH AHMED, ADVOCATE) AND: AWFIS SPACE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT C-28, 29 KISSAN BHAWAN, QUTAB INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEW DELHI - 110 016. EMAIL: legal@awfis.com …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SANJAY H. SETHIYA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7924 CMP No. 404 of 2024 THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(5) AND 11 (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AND AS PER CLAUSE 16.2 OF THE SERVICE AGREEMENT DATED 25.07.2022 (ANNEXURE-C) TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE DISPUTES/DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under section 11(5) and 11(6)of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1996 Act'), seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties in terms of the Arbitration Clause provided under the agreement evidenced at Annexure-C dated 25.07.2022. 2. The petitioner asserts that a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was executed between the parties, establishing the framework for the proposed tenancy arrangement. As per the terms agreed upon, the tenancy was to be governed by specific financial and operational commitments. The petitioner contends that, in furtherance of the understanding reached between the parties, a formal - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7924 CMP No. 404 of 2024 agreement was executed on 25.07.2022, setting out the details of the financial obligations and responsibilities of both parties. 3. According to the petitioner, under the terms of the agreement dated 25.07.2022, the respondent was obligated to pay a sum of Rs.27,47,610/- per month as service charges, which were intended to cover the maintenance and upkeep of the premises. Additionally, a refundable security deposit of Rs.1,64,85,680/- was agreed upon, which was to remain interest-free for the duration of the agreement. The petitioner alleges that despite the imposition of substantial service charges on a monthly basis, the respondent has failed to fulfill its obligation of maintaining the premises in a satisfactory condition. As a result of this non-compliance, the petitioner claims it was compelled to terminate the service agreement. Following the termination, the petitioner requested a joint inspection of the premises to assess the condition of the property, but this request became a point of contention between the parties, leading to a dispute. In light of the dispute, and relying on the Arbitration Clause stipulated in the agreement, the petitioner issued a legal notice invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7924 CMP No. 404 of 2024 Act, 1996. The respondent, in its reply to the said notice, contested the claims raised by the petitioner. 4. However, while the respondent has challenged the allegations made in the petitioner's legal notice, it has not disputed the existence of the Arbitration Clause within the agreement. On the contrary, the respondent has explicitly conveyed that it has no objection to resolving the present dispute through arbitration proceedings. Given the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent, and in view of the fact that the existence of the Arbitration Clause remains undisputed, this Court finds merit in allowing the petition. Moreover, considering the statutory mandate prescribed under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petition and direct the initiation of arbitration proceedings in accordance with the agreed terms. 5. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed appointing Sri. Justice A.S. Bopanna, former - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7924 CMP No. 404 of 2024 Judge, *Supreme Court of India, as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent and conduct proceedings at the Arbitration & 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. Justice A.S. Bopanna, former Judge, *Supreme Court of India, as required under the Arbitration & Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE sac List No.: 3 Sl No.: 18 * Corrected vide chamber Order dated 28.3.2025