- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NOS.799 OF 2022 AND 804 OF 2022 IN CMP NO.763/2022 BETWEEN: MR. RAVIKUMAR RAJENDRAPRASAD S/O RAJENDRA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT 602, CONFIDENT AQUILA, YAMERE VILLAGE, SARJAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU - 562 125. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PAARAS PANDEY, ADVOCATE AND SRI. ERATHI ANUDEEP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRIKANTH V.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BIOFI MEDICAL HEALTHCARE INDIA PVT.LTD. PLOT NO.208, BOMMSANANDRA, JIGANI LINK ROAD, BOMMASANDRA, JIGANI INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU - 560 105. 2. MR. GIRIMAJI SATHYANARAYANA RAO RAVI S/O GIRIMAJI VENKAT RAO SATHYANARAYANA RAO AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.1629, 31ST CROSS Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 18TH MAIN, MANJUNATHA TEMPLE, B.S.K. 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 070. 3. D.N. PRAHLAD S/O D. NAGARAJACHARI AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.1, SETLUR STREET, LANFORD TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 025. 4. MR. PAULDURAI SHANMUGAM S/O SHANMUGAM, AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.405, 'B' BLOCK, N.D. PASSION APTS, HARALUR ROAD, KUDLU VILLAGE, BENGALURU - 560 068. 5. SRIRAM VELLIYUR FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER AGE: MAJOR R/AT.H-202, S.N.N. RAJ LAKE VIEW PHASE-2, RANKA COLONY ROAD, B.T.M. 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 076. 6. SURYAPRAKASH MAGULURI S/O VENKATESHWAR RAO MAGULURI, AGE: MAJOR R/AT PLOT NO.8, FLAT NO.301, SAIKRUPA ENCLAVE, SAI RAM VIEW OPP. CHICKEN BASKET NEAR GHNASHYAM SUPER MARKET, KHAJAGUDA RANGAREDDY TELANGANA - 500 089. 7. R. AMBARISH S/O HEDATHALE RAMASASTRY R/AT APARTMENT 5A DEVUVILLE APARTMENTS, NO.19, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 CHURCH STREET, BENGALURU - 60 001. 8. MAGULUR KESHAVAMURTHY SATHYAPRASAD FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITTIONER, AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.11/21, 4TH CROSS, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGARA, ASHOKA PILLAR, BENGALURU SOUTH, JAYANAGAR III BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 011. 9. KASU VENKATA RAJAGOPAL REDDY FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.1, SREE BHAGAVATHY, PANNATHUR ROAD, NEAR BELLANDUR, YAMALUR, BENGALURU SOUTH, YAMALUR, BENGALURU - 560 037. 10. ANIRBAN LAHIRI FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.B1102, TOWER 4, GODREJ WOODSMAN, ESTATE, BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU - 560 024. 11. NALIN JASWANTSINH NANAVATI FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PEITIONER AGED: MAJOR R/AT NO.11/16, ORMES ROAD, 3RD CROSS STREET, KILPAUK, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU - 600 010. 12. BHAGAVAN SRINIVSAN FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, AGE: MAJOR, NO.420/96, 43RD CROSS, R/AT 8TH BLOCK, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 082. 13. KAAJ VENTURES LLS, USA, REPRESENTED BY B.V. JAGADEESH C/O BIOFI MEDICAL HEALTHCARE INDIA PVT. LTD., PLOT NO.208, BOMMASANDRA JIGANI LINK ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 105. 14. RAJESH NALLAPATI FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, AGE: MAJOR, R/AT PLOT NO.58, FIRST FLOOR, BESIDES HANUMAN TEMPLE, ANAND BAGH, MALAKSGIRI, HYDERABAD - 500 047. 15. BANG DESIGN PRIVATE LIMITED LOCATED AT:23 AND 24, 4TH CROSS, BABUSAPALYA, BENGALURU - 560 043. 16. SAMATUAM SCIENCE AND RESEARCH FOR HUMAN WELFARE TRUST C/O BIOFI MEDICAL HEALTHCARE INDIA PVT. LTD., PLOT NO.208, BOMMSANDRA, JIGANI LINK ROAD, BOMMASANDRA - JIGANI INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU - 560 105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SANJAY KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R8; SRI. V. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R15; SRI. DEEPAK BHASKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R7; SRI. LOKESHA K., ADVOCATE FOR R4, R5 AND R6; R9, R12 AND R16 - SERVED; V/O DATED 14.02.2025, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 IS HELD SUFFICIENT; V/O DATED 05.06.2025, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS 10, 11, 13 AND 14 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE DISPUTES RAISED BY THE PARTIES IN THE ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS AS PER THE SHAREHOLDERS' AGREEMENT DATED 12TH OCTOBER, 2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-C. IN CMP NO.799/2022 BETWEEN: MRS. AMUTHA DEVI RAVIKUMAR W/O RAVIKUMR RAJENDRAPRASAD AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/A: A602 CONFIDENT AQUILA, YAMERE VILLAGE, SARJAPUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 562 125. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. PAARAS PANDEY, ADVOCATE AND SRI. ERATHI ANUDEEP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRIKANTH V.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S BIOFI MEDICAL HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, LOCATED AT PLOT.208, BOMMASANDRA JIGANI LINK ROAD, INDUSTRIAL AREA, BOMMASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 105. 2. MR. PAULDURAI SHANMUGAM S/O SHANMUGAM, R/AT NO.405, 'B' BLOCK, N.D. PASSION APARTMENTS, HARALUR ROAD, KUDLU VILLAGE, BENGALURU - 560 068. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 3. MR. GIRIMAJI SATHYANARAYANA RAO RAVI S/O GIRIMAJI VENKAT RAO SATHYANARAYANA RAO R/AT:NO.1629, 31ST CROSS, 18TH MAIN, MANJUNATHA TEMPLE, B.S.K. 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 070. 4. MR. D.N. PRAHLAD S/O D. NAGARAJACHAR R/AT NO.1, SETLUR STREET, LANFORD TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 025. 5. R. AMBARISH S/O HEDATHALE RAMASASTRY, R/AT APARTMENT 5A, DEAUVILLE APARTMENT NO.19, CHURCH STREET, BENGALURU - 560 001. 6. SURYAPRAKASH MAGALURI PIXEL A BLOCK 2ND FLOOR, P.E.S. UNIVERSITY, 'ELECTRONIC CITY SOUTH CAMPUS, HOSUR ROAD, KONAPPANA AGRAHARA, ELECTRONIC CITY, BENGALURU - 560 100. 7. SRIRAM VELLIYUR PIXEL A BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, P.E.S. UNIVERSITY, 'ELECTRONIC CITY SOUTH CAMPUS, HOSUR ROAD, KONAPPANA AGRAHARA, ELECTRONIC CITY,- BENGALURU - 560 100. 8. MR. SHANKAR SURYANARAYAN S/O T. SURAYANARAYAN R/AT NO.319, 6TH MAIN, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 3RD CROSS, NGEF LAYOUT, SANDANANDA NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU - 560 038. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SANJAY KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. PAVAN N., ADVOCATE FOR R8; SRI. DEEPAK BHASKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5; SRI. LOKESHA K., ADVOCATE FOR R2, R6 AND R7; V/O DATED 26.03.2025, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE DISPUTES RAISED BY THE PARTIES IN THE ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS AS PER THE SHAREHOLDERS' AGREEMENT DATED 12TH OCTOBER, 2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-C. IN CMP NO.804/2022 BETWEEN: MR. KANNAPIRAN P. S/O MR. PONRAJ, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.B-1, FIRST FLOOR, FORTUNE FLATS, E.B. COLONY, KOVALAN NAGAR, MADURAI - 625 003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PAARAS PANDEY, ADVOCATE AND SRI. ERATHI ANUDEEP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRIKANTH V.K., ADVOCATE) AND: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 1. M/S BIOFI MEDICAL HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED LOCATED AT: PLOT 208, BOMMASANDRA JIGANI LINK ROAD INDUSTRIAL AREA, BOMMASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 105. 2. MR. PAULDURAI SHANMUGAM S/O SHANMUGAM R/A NO.405, 'B' BLOCK, N.D. PASSION APARTMENTS HARALUR ROAD, KUDLU VILLAGE, BENGALURU - 560 068. 3. MR. GIRIMAJI SATHYANARAYANA RAO RAVI S/O GIRIMAJI VENKAT RAO SATHYANARAYANA RAO AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.1629, 31ST CROSS, 18TH MAIN, MANJUNATHA TEMPLE, BSK 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 070. 4. MR. SHANKAR SURYANARAYAN S/O T. SURYANARAYAN R/AT: NO.319, 6TH MAIN, 3RD CROSS, NGEF LAYOUT, SADANANDA NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 038. 5. MR. D.N. PRAHLAD S/O D. NAGARAJACHAR R/AT: NO.1, SETLUR STREET, LANFORD TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 025. 6. R. AMBARISH S/O HEDTHALE RAMASASTRY R/AT APARTMENT 5A, DEAUVILLE APARTMENT NO.19, CHURCH STREET, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 BENGALURU - 560 001. 7. SURYAPRAKASH MAGULURI S/O VENKATESHWARA RAO MAGALURI, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT PLOT NO. 123, PART SHILPA GARDEN, MALLESHWARI IMPERIA, MADDENAGUDDA, HYDERABAD, TELANGALA - 500 049. 8. SRIRAM VELLIYUR FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETTIONER AGE: MAJOR, R/AT: H202, S.N.N. RAJ LAKE VIEW PHASE-2, RANKA COLONY ROA, BTM 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 076. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SANJAY KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. PAVAN N., ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI. DEEPAK BHASKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5 AND R6; SRI. LOKESHA K., ADVOCATE FOR R2, R7 AND R8 V/O DATED 26.03.2025, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF DISPUTES RAISED BY THE PARTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLUASE 17.09 OF THE SHAREHOLDERS' AGREEMENT DATED 12TH OCTOBER, 2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS SUIT. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 ORAL ORDER These petitions are filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties in terms of clause 17.9 of the Shareholders' Agreement Dated 12th October, 2020. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Sri. Paaras Pandey and Sri. Erathi Anudeep, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. Srikanth V.K, appearing for the petitioners, by referring to clause 17.9 of the Shareholders' Agreement dated 12th October, 2020 contended that the petitioners have been ousted by majority of the shareholders and therefore, sought for appointment of an Arbitrator as per clause 17.9 of the Shareholders' Agreement dated 12th October, 2020. 4. Per contra, Sri. V. Sanjay Krishna, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 8 in C.M.P No.763 of 2022 and respondent No.3 in C.M.P. Nos.799 of 2022 and 804 of 2022 invited the attention to the statement of objections particularly with regard to various forums in which the petitioners herein - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 have approached and by referring to the paragraphs 44 and 50 of the plaint in Original Suit No.277 of 2021, argued that the said plaint filed by the plaintiffs therein was ordered to be returned by the Competent Court to the plaintiffs therein to present before the appropriate competent Court having jurisdiction as per the order dated 30th August, 2023. 5. Sri. V. Sanjay Krishna, learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners have filed C.P. No.86/BB/2021 before the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru against the Company and its Directors, challenging the transfer of shares and thereafter, they have sought for withdrawal of the petition with a liberty to file fresh petition and the said aspect was considered by the National Company Law Tribunal as per order dated 17th April, 2023. Sri. V. Sanjay Krishna, learned counsel by referring to the private complaint filed in P.C.R. No.125/2022 under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the I Additional JMFC, Anekal, argued that the said proceedings filed by the petitioners was stayed before this Court in Criminal Petition No.5357 of 2022. Further, Sri. V. Sanjay Krishna, learned counsel, by placing the reliance on the - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SUKANYA HOLDINGS (P) LTD. vs. JAYESH H. PANDYA reported in (2003)5 SCC 531, particularly to paragraphs 16 and 17 of the said judgment, argued that the petitioners are making bifurcation of the cause of action and claiming relief before the different forums on the very same cause of action and therefore, the present petitions are required to be dismissed. 6. Sri. V. Sanjay Krishna, learned counsel further placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of VIJAY KUMAR GHAI AND OTHERS vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS reported in (2022)7 SCC 124 particularly to the paragraph 14 of the judgment and argued that the petitioners have chosen various forums and they are not able to get a relief from the competent forum and therefore, the action of the petitioners indulging in forum shopping is to be deprecated and condemned by looking into their conduct and accordingly, the petitions are required to be dismissed. 7. Sri. V. Sanjay Krishna, learned counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of VIRGO INDUSTRIES (ENG.) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 VENTURETECH SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED reported in (2013)1 SCC 625 in respect of Order II Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and argued that, it is the duty of the applicant/petitioner/plaintiff to include all the claims in respect of particular cause of action and the cause of action cannot be devisable as per the forum as taken by the petitioners. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petitions. 8. Sri. Deepak Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 7 in CMP No.763 of 2022, respondents 4 and 5 in CMP No.799 of 2022 and respondents 5 and 6 in CMP No.804 of 2022 referred to the clause 17.8 of the Shareholders' Agreement dated 12th October, 2020, which provides for jurisdiction in respect of resolution of disputes between the parties and submitted that the lis as contended by the petitioners cannot be arbitrable in nature. 9. Sri. Lokesh K., learned counsel appearing for respondents 4, 5 and 6 in CMP No.763 of 2022, respondents 2, 6 and 7 in CMP No.799 of 2022 and respondents 2, 7 and 8 in CMP No.804 of 2022 submits that the said respondents are not the parties to the lis and therefore, they cannot be directed to - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 make available the Shareholders' Agreement dated 12th October, 2020. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the present petitions. 10. Sri. Pavan N., learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.8 in CMP No.799 of 2022 and respondent No.4 in CMP No.804 of 2022 submits that the said respondent is not a signatory to the Shareholders' Agreement dated 12th October, 2020. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petitions. 11. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have given my anxious consideration to clause 17.9 of the Shareholders' Agreement dated 12th October, 2020, which reads as under: "17.9 Dispute Resolution. 17.9.1 All disputes and differences arising out of or in connection with any of the matters setout in this Agreement ("Dispute"), if not resolved by amicable settlement within 30 (thirty) days from the Dispute, shall be finally and conclusively determined by arbitration by a sole arbitrator mutually appointed by the parties to the dispute, in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, of India, for the time being in fore. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 17.9.2 The arbitrator shall reach and render a decision in writing with respect to the appropriate award to be rendered or remedy to be granted pursuant to the dispute. 17.9.3 To the extent practical, decisions of the arbitrator shall be rendered no more than 90 (ninety) days following commencement of proceedings with respect thereto. 17.9.4 The arbitration shall be conducted in English, and the seat and venue for arbitration shall be Bengaluru. 17.9.5 The arbitrator shall be entitled to award costs of the arbitration." 12. I have also noticed from clause 17.15, which provides for relationship between the parties to the Agreement dated 12th October, 2020. It is also clear from the clause 17.8 that the laws of India are made applicable to the parties in the event of any dispute arises between the parties. Clause 17.8.2 - Subject to clause 17.9 (Dispute Resolution) provides for the parties to approach the Courts at Bengaluru, Karnataka in connection with the Agreement subject to other provisions in the said Agreement. 13. It is not in dispute that the petitioners have approached the competent Civil Court by filing Original Suit - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 No.277 of 2021, seeking relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from accessing the Assets of the plaintiff No.1, in which, the defendants are claiming title in respect of the schedule property. It is also not in dispute that the competent Civil Court, by order dated 30th August, 2023, returned the plaint to the plaintiffs to present before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction. I have also noticed that the petitioners have approached the National Company Law Tribunal, Benglauru in C.A. Nos.25, 41, 105/2022, C.A. No.4/2023, in which the petitioners have made an application seeking withdrawal of the application with liberty to file fresh petition and the said prayer made by the petitioners has been accepted by the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru on 17th April, 2023. 14. It is also forthcoming from the records that the petitioners have approached the competent Criminal Court by filing P.C.R. No.125/22, alleging an element of fraud against the respondents. It is to be noted that, this Court, by order dated 15th June, 2022, stayed further proceedings arising out of Crime No.103/2022 filed by the petitioners. On perusal of the - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of VIRGO INDUSTRIES (ENG.) PRIVATE LIMITED (supra), the same would indicate that the said judgment is relating to the Order II Rule 2(2) and (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, in which, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, Order II Rule 2(2) does not contemplate the omission or relinquishment of any portion of the plaintiff's claim with the leave of the court so as to entitle him to come back later to seek what has been omitted or relinquished. In the above case, the cause of action in each of the proceedings is based on different cause of action, despite the parties are same. 15. Insofar as the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SUKANYA HOLDINGS (P) LTD. (supra), the same is relating to the application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in which, the bifurcation of the cause of action was made by the parties and the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, such bifurcation of the cause of action would result in delaying the proceedings before the Civil Court. - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 16. It is also relevant to mention here that, in the case of VIJAY KUMAR GHAI (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court observed with regard to forum shopping by the litigants in which the litigants approaching the various forums for resolution of the dispute and such action of the parties has been deprecated. In the backdrop of these aspects, on careful examination of the averments made in the petition and clause 17.9, which provides for Dispute Resolution, I am of the view that, though the learned counsel appearing for respondents strenuously contended about the various litigations referred to above, in view of the clause 17.9 of the Shareholders' Agreement dated 12th October, 2020, which provides for resolution of the dispute between the parties or in connection with the same. through the Arbitrator. Therefore, in my considered opinion, petitioners have made out the case for appointment of Arbitrator. 17. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajit J. Gunjal, Former Judge of this Court is appointed as Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties at the Arbitration and - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34498 CMP NO.763 OF 2022 C/W CMP NO.799 OF 2022 CMP NO.804 OF 2022 Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru. In order to avoid further delay in the matter, parties are directed to appear before the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru on 14th October, 2025. 18. All claims and contentions of the parties are kept open to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal. 19. A copy of this order be sent forthwith to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru for proceeding further in the matter. 20. Registry is directed to return the original documents if any, produced by the parties, after obtaining photostat copy of the same for the file. Accordingly, Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20