MYCON CONSTRUCTION LTD., v. THE COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA SLUM DEVELOPMENT BOARD
CMP/97/2024 · 2025-02-14
Sachin Shankar Magadum
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 58069 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 58069 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6819 CMP No. 97 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. 97 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1.
MYCON CONSTRUCTION LTD.
INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED ADDRESS AT INDUSTRY HOUSE 45, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. ANIL KUMAR MALPANI …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRANAY PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NISCHAL DEV .B.R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA SLUM DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.55, 1ST FLOOR, ABHAYA COMPLEX RISALDAR STREET, SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU-560 020. …RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. SHWETA KRISHNAPPA, AGA ALONG WITH SRI. H.N. VASUDEVAN, AGA)
THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILE DUNDER SEC.11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN INDEPENDENT AND IMPARTIAL SOLE ARBITRATOR FOR REFERENCE OF THE DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THE CONTRACT AGREEMENT DATED 28/05/2018 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE
Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6819 CMP No. 97 of 2024
PETITIONER PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 24 OF GCC READ WITH CLAUSE 4 OF THE SCC VIDE ANNEXURE-C.
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 (for short 'the Act') seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute and difference between the petitioner and respondent in terms of the conditions of contract entered into between them dated 28.05.2018. 2. Respondent on receipt of notice has tendered appearance and has engaged the learned counsel. 3. Petitioner, relying on the terms of the contract with the respondent, asserts that the contract was to be completed within 12 months from the date of execution. However, it is alleged that substantial delays and contractual breaches were caused by the respondent, including the failure to hand over the entire site within the
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6819 CMP No. 97 of 2024
stipulated timeframe. These delays, which were entirely beyond the petitioner’s reasonable control, significantly impacted the performance of the contract. As a result, the petitioner alleges that he has incurred substantial losses and made multiple attempts to amicably resolve the dispute by issuing several letters to the respondent, including those dated 29.05.2023 and 25.09.2023. In accordance with Clause 24.2 of the contract conditions, the petitioner also approached the Principal Secretary, Government of Karnataka (Housing), through a letter dated 04.12.2023, stressing the urgency of the matter. However, with no response from the Principal Secretary, the petitioner proceeded to invoke the arbitration clause under Clause 24 of the General Conditions of Contract read with Clause 4 of the Special Conditions of Contract by issuing a notice dated 08.01.2024. 4. The respondent has not contested the petition. The records indicate that despite multiple communications from the petitioner to the relevant authorities and the
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6819 CMP No. 97 of 2024
formal notice invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the respondents neither acted upon the petitioner’s requests nor provided any response. 5. On closer examination of the annexures annexed to the petition, this Court of the view that petitioner has succeeded in substantiating the existence of the arbitration clause and the dispute exists between the petitioner and respondent. This Court is satisfied that the petitioner has complied the mandate contemplated under Section 11(4) of the Act, 1996. 6.
In the light of aforesaid clause of arbitration and the contentions advanced by the petitioner, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed appointing Shri. Justice V. Jagannathan, Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka, as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the disputes
- 5 -
NC: 2025:KHC:6819 CMP No. 97 of 2024
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. Justice V. Jagannathan, Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012.
Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
ALB List No.: 3