- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45759 CMP No. 380 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO.380 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SANJAY MARKETING AND PUBLICITY SERVICES A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.21, 1ST FLOOR, 36TH CROSS, 17TH MAIN, 4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 041. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. REVANNA NAGARAJ REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER MR. DARSHAN NAGARAJ. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PIYUSH KUMAR JAIN D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KARNATAKA STATE CRICKET ASSOCIATION A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960. M. CHINNA SWAMY STADIUM, CUBBON ROAD, Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45759 CMP No. 380 of 2025 BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.K. SAMPATH KUMAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. RAVI SHANKAR R., ADVOCATE) ************** THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER 11(6) FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR UNDER THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR UNDER GENERAL CONDITION NO.12 OF THE CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT VOLUME 1 (ANNUEXURE - J) TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS AND EXPEDITIOUS RESOLUTION OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, CONSTITUTE A THREE MEMBER ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE PETITIONER'S NOMINATION MADE IN THE ARBITRATION NOTICE DATED APRIL 12, 2025. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45759 CMP No. 380 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this petition, petitioner has sought for appointment of an Arbitrator as per condition 12 of the conditions of Contract - Volume I as per the Contract dated 25.10.2021 (referred to in Annexure - J). 3. Sri. Piyush Kumar Jain D., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has participated in the tender for proposed interior lighting, soft furnishing and allied works of the respondent as per Annexure-J. As per Clause 12 of General Conditions at Volume I of the Contract at Annexure-J, resolution of dispute has to be made by an Arbitrator and therefore he refers to the contract agreement dated 25.10.2021(Annexure-C), particularly mentioning about Clause 6 of Annexure-C and submitted that it is imperative for this Court to appoint the Arbitrator for resolution of dispute between the parties concerned. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45759 CMP No. 380 of 2025 4. Per contra, Sri. B.K. Sampath Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. Ravi Shankar R., learned counsel for the respondent, referred to Clause 12 in the tender document produced at Annexure-J and further Clause 27 of Annexure-C which provides for settlement of dispute and submitted that the petitioner has to exhaust the remedy available under Clause 27 of the Contract agreement at Annexure-C and therefore, the provision provided at Clause 12 of the tender document at Annexure-J cannot be made to give way for appointment of Arbitrator and in this regard, he refers to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NBCC (INDIA) LIMITED Vs. ZILLION INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMTED reported in (2024) 7 SCC 174, particularly with reference to Para 16 and argued that unless there is a specific clause provided for appointment of Arbitrator in the contract agreement, the provision under S.11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot be applied by this Court to appoint an Arbitrator for resolution of dispute and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45759 CMP No. 380 of 2025 5. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that respondent has invited application / offered for participation by respective agencies for proposed interior lighting, soft furnishing and allied works and therefore the Tender document produced at Annexure-J to the petition. Clause 12 of the Annexure-J provides for settlement of dispute by an Arbitrator. It is also pertinent to mention here that pursuant to the conclusion of the Tender process, the petitioner being a successful bidder, has entered into a contract agreement dated 25.10.2011 (Annexure-C), with the respondent. 6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I have carefully examined Clause 6 of the contract agreement dated 25.10.2011 (Annexure-C), wherein, though it stipulates about the Tender document and such other documents referred to therein, however, specifically it is stated that Clause 27 provides for resolution of dispute between the parties arising out of the contract agreement dated 25.10.2011 (Annexure-C). In that view of the matter, it is for the petitioner to exhaust the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45759 CMP No. 380 of 2025 remedy provided under Clause 27 of Annexure-C in so far as resolution of dispute is concerned. It is also to be noted that, there is no specific clause provided in the contract agreement dated 25.10.2011 (Annexure-C) for resolution of dispute by an Arbitrator under S.11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In that view of the matter, considering the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, referred to above, wherein it is stated that unless there is specific clause which provides for resolution of dispute by an Arbitrator, Arbitrator cannot be appointed. Therefore, I am of the view that, the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. Accordingly, I do not find any acceptable ground to interfere in this petition. 7. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13