- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4320 CMP No. 100010 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA CIVIL MISC PETITION NO. 100010 OF 2023 (-) BETWEEN: SRI. RAMANNA MAKTUM PASALKAR, PARTNER SHRI RENUKA BAR AND RESTAURANT, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H. NO. 3 MARUTI ROAD, OLD GHANDI NAGAR, DISTRICT – BELGAUM 590016. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VISHWANATHA K. BHAT (NOC), ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SHARADA W/O. MARUTI KALAL, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. MURGOD, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DISTRICT – BELGAUM. 591126. 2. SRI. BABAN NARAYANA LAD, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. CTS NO. 1162, KONWAL GALLI, BELGAUM, MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4320 CMP No. 100010 of 2023 DISTRICT – BELGAUM. 590001. 3. SRI. RANJIT LAXMAN KOTEKAR, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. SHIVAJI NAGAR, BELGAUM, DISTRICT – BELGAUM. 590016. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR, BURJI, ADVOCATE) ------ THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND APPOINT FOR ARBITRATOR OR ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION OR ANY QUALIFIED PERSON AS DEEMED FIT BY THIS HON’BLE COURT AS SOLE ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTES BETWEEN PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS AS PER THE RECONSTITUTION PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 28.02.2015 VIDE DOCUMENT NO. 2. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4320 CMP No. 100010 of 2023 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the A & C Act’), seeking appointment of the Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondents, as per the terms of the reconstitution of the partnership deed dated 28.02.2015 produced as Document No.2. 2. Heard Sri.Vishwanath Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Rajashekhar Burji, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the materials on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per the terms of the reconstituted partnership deed dated 28.02.2015, the dispute between the partners is agreed to be referred to the Arbitrator, and accordingly, the petitioner is seeking appointment of the Arbitrator. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4320 CMP No. 100010 of 2023 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents, opposing the petition, submitted that the petitioner is seeking appointment of the Arbitrator based on the recitals found in the reconstitution of partnership deed dated 28.02.2015 produced as per Document No.2. A specific contention was taken by the respondents that the said document dated 28.02.2015 is a concocted document with the forged signatures of the partners of the firm. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents has drawn the attention of the Court to the order dated 18.04.2024 passed in PCR No.52/2022, on the file of the Learned JMFC-II, Belagavi, to contend that the partners have filed the Private Complaint in PCR No.52/2022, against the petitioner herein, seeking to initiate criminal action for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 463, 464, 465, 468, 470 and 471 of the IPC. A specific contention was raised by the respondents that the document styled as ‘Reconstitution of Partnership - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4320 CMP No. 100010 of 2023 Deed’ dated 28.02.2015, is a concocted document with the forged signatures of the partners, and the learned Magistrate, after taking into consideration the materials on record, took cognizance of offence for the above said offences. It is his contention that, after registering the criminal case, summons was issued against the petitioner herein. Therefore, it is his contention that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. On perusal of the materials on record, it is clear that the petitioner is seeking appointment of an Arbitrator as per the terms of the reconstituted partnership deed dated 28.02.2015, which is produced as Document No.2. The contesting respondents have taken specific defense that the said document is a concocted and forged document. 7. Admittedly, a private complaint in PCR No.52/2022 has been filed by the respondents against the petitioner herein. Even according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Magistrate took - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4320 CMP No. 100010 of 2023 cognizance of the offences and summoned the petitioner to appear in the criminal proceedings. When the claim of the petitioner for appointment of the Arbitrator is based on a seriously disputed document, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief of appointing the Arbitrator. 8. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. In view of disposal of the main petition, pending I.As. do not survive for consideration. Sd/- (M.G.UMA) JUDGE gab CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1