M/S. PEARSON INDIA EDUCATION SERVICES PRIAVATE LIMITED v. ARYA GURUKUL
CMP/63/2023 · 2025-02-11
Sachin Shankar Magadum
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48981 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48981 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6046 CMP No. 63 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 63 OF 2023 BETWEEN:
M/S. PEARSON INDIA EDUCATION SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 7TH FLOOR, SDB2, ODC 7, 8 AND 9, SURVEY NO.1 ELCOT IT/ITES - SEZ, SHOLINGANALLUR, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU - 600 119.
HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT NO. 11, GROUND FLOOR A WING, DIVYASHREE CHAMBERS, O SHAUGHNESSY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 025. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JIDESH KUMAR M.D, ADVOCATE) AND:
ARYA GURUKUL MANAGED BY EDUCATION TODAY FOUNDATION TRUST, VIDYANAGARI, NANDIVALI ROAD, SHREE MALANG ROAD, KALYAN(E), MAHARASHTRA - 421 306, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN OF EDUCATION TODAY FOUNDATION TRUST, SRI. BHART MALIK. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MURTHY MOHAN, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6046 CMP No. 63 of 2023
THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATING THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT, IN PURSUANCE TO THE CLAUSE 16.10 OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 31.03.2010 VIDE ANNEXURE B, 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(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute and difference between the parties in terms of agreement to build a ITC dated 31.03.2010. 2. Respondent-firm, has also tendered appearance and have engaged the lawyer. 3. The petitioner, in accordance with the arbitration clause embedded in the agreement, initiated the arbitration process by nominating an arbitrator to
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6046 CMP No. 63 of 2023
adjudicate the dispute. As part of this process, the petitioner issued formal notices to the respondent at the address specified in the agreement, informing them of the arbitration proceedings and requesting their participation. Despite due and proper service of such notices, the respondent failed to respond or take any steps to engage with the arbitration process. Given the respondent’s inaction and lack of cooperation, the petitioner had no recourse but to approach this Hon’ble Court by filing an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in CMP No.203/2015, seeking the appointment of an arbitrator. Upon due consideration, this Hon’ble Court, by its order dated 19.08.2016, allowed the application and appointed Shri Bolar Yeshwant Kumar, Retired Civil Judge, as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute. 4. The petitioner contends that even after the commencement of arbitration proceedings, the respondent remained absent and failed to participate, leading to their
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6046 CMP No. 63 of 2023
placement ex-parte. The arbitral tribunal, after conducting proceedings in accordance with the applicable laws and after considering the evidence presented by the petitioner, rendered its final award on 20.04.2018. In its award, the tribunal allowed the petitioner’s claim in full and held that the respondent was liable to pay a sum of Rs.34,76,600/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. However, the respondent, aggrieved by the said award, subsequently filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act seeking to set aside the award dated 20.04.2018. Upon adjudication, the court allowed the respondent’s petition and set aside the arbitral award, thereby nullifying the decision of the tribunal. 5.
Following this development, the petitioner approached this Hon’ble Court by way of an interlocutory application (IA) under Section 14(1)(a) read with Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, seeking the appointment of a substitute arbitrator due to the demise of the previously appointed arbitrator, Shri Bolar Yeshwant
- 5 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6046 CMP No. 63 of 2023
Kumar. The court, after due consideration, disposed of the IA vide its order dated 17.06.2022, directing the petitioner to initiate fresh proceedings for the appointment of an arbitrator. In compliance with the said directions and to ensure that the dispute is adjudicated in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the petitioner has now filed the present petition before this Hon’ble Court, seeking the appointment of a substitute arbitrator. 6. Given the prolonged inaction and lack of participation on the part of the respondent, the petitioner is left with no alternative but to seek the intervention of this Hon’ble Court for the appointment of an arbitrator. The petitioner has meticulously complied with all procedural requirements as stipulated under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, including serving notices and furnishing all necessary supporting documents. Upon careful examination of the petition, annexures, and relevant legal provisions, this Hon’ble
- 6 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6046 CMP No. 63 of 2023
Court finds that the petitioner has duly satisfied the procedural prerequisites and is entitled to seek the relief prayed for. 7. In view of the arbitration clause (Clause 16.10) of the joint agreement and the submissions made by the petitioner, this Court deems it appropriate to proceed with the following order:
ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed appointing Sri.H M Nanjundaswamy, Former Retired District and Sessions Judge as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent and conduct proceedings at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru, according to the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre.
- 7 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6046 CMP No. 63 of 2023
(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.H M Nanjundaswamy, Former Retired District and Sessions Judge, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012.
Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41 CT: BHK