- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6815 CMP No. 283 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 283 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. MR. N. RIYAZ AHMED S/O LATE ABDUL RASHID AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/A NO.50, MOORE ROAD, FRAZER TOWN, BENGALURU-560 005. MOB 9164113333. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.D.RAGHUNATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. NAGEENA BEGUM W/O MUJEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/A CENTER POINT, 109M FLAT NO.301 3RD FLOOR, ABOVE DOMINOS PIZZA BANASWADI MAIN ROAD MARUTISEVANAGAR BENGALURU-560 033. MOB-9342945816 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. N.DINAKAR, ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC. 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE REGARDING VIOLATION OF THE AGREEMENT OF COMPROMISE DATED 31.08.2017 SUBSISTING BETWEEN THE PARTIES AT ANNEXURE B AS PER UNNUMBERED Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6815 CMP No. 283 of 2024 CLAUSE OF THE AGREEMENT OF COMPROMISE AND CLAUSE NO 20 OF ANNEXURE-A JDA AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned civil miscellaneous petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the Act, 1996") seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondent in terms with the joint development agreement dated 31.08.2017 coupled with the supplement agreement of compromise dated 31.08.2017 evidenced at Annexure-B. 2. Respondent on receipt of notice has tendered appearance and has engaged the learned counsel. 3. The petitioner, relying on the terms of the Joint Development Agreement and the subsequent Agreement of Compromise, contends that despite issuing a formal notice, the respondent has failed to refund the security - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6815 CMP No. 283 of 2024 deposit of Rs.45 lakhs as stipulated in the Agreement of Compromise dated 31.08.2017. The petitioner asserts that, in furtherance of the Joint Development Agreement executed with respondent No.5, a security deposit of Rs.65 lakhs was paid, of which Rs.25 lakhs was agreed to be non-refundable, while the remaining Rs.40 lakhs was refundable. The petitioner maintains that after fulfilling his obligations under the Joint Development Agreement, he invoked the arbitration clause by issuing a notice in accordance with Section 21 of the Act, 1996, seeking resolution of the dispute. 4. The respondent, however, has contested the notice issued under Section 21 of the Act, 1996, alleging that the petitioner has committed a breach of the terms of the agreement. The respondent argues that due to this alleged breach, the petitioner is not entitled to claim any refund under the Agreement of Compromise. Additionally, the respondent has raised a fundamental objection regarding the validity and enforceability of the Agreement - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6815 CMP No. 283 of 2024 of Compromise itself, contending that it is an unregistered document and, therefore, cannot be relied upon to seek a refund. 5. Upon a thorough examination of the documents and annexures submitted along with the Civil Miscellaneous Petition, this Court finds that the petitioner has successfully demonstrated the existence of an arbitration clause within the Joint Development Agreement. While the respondent has raised objections regarding the enforceability of the Agreement of Compromise, such matters, including the entitlement of the petitioner to a refund of the security deposit, fall within the domain of the arbitrator’s adjudication. Accordingly, all contentions of both parties are kept open, and the dispute is referred to arbitration. Furthermore, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner has met the procedural requirements mandated under Section 11(4) of the Act, 1996, justifying the appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve the matter. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6815 CMP No. 283 of 2024 6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed appointing Shri. S. Siddalingesh, Retired District 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. (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 Shri. S. Siddalingesh, Retired District Judge, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 3 Sl No.: 18