- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42248 CMP No. 126 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 126 OF 2025 (-) BETWEEN: SRI K R SURESH S/O K.RAMAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT NO.416, 13TH A MAIN ROAD, HAL 2ND STAGE, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANJA REDDY P N.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SUKRITHA BUILDMANN P LIMITED REPTD., BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR T.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.27, II FLOOR, SATHYANARAYANA TEMPLE STREET, ULSOOR, BENGALURU - 560 008. AND ALSO AT SRI.T.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, R/AT.FLAT NO.1604, B4 BLOCK, 16TH FLOOR, L T SOUTH CITY, ARIKERE, 7TH PHASE, MICO LAY OUT, BENGALURU-560 078. 2. SRI.ASHWIN BALASUBRAMANIAN, S/O T.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN, MAJOR IN AGE R/AT. FLAT NO.206, C2 BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, L T SOUTH CITY, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42248 CMP No. 126 of 2025 ARIKERE, 7TH PHASE, MICO LAYOUT BENGALURU 560078 …RESPONDENTS (R1-SERVED; V/O/D 19.3.2025 PETITION IS DISMISSED AGAINST R2) THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPONT AN ARBITRATOR AS PER CLAUSE XXVII OF THE JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED 31.03.2011 AS PER ANNEXURE-A IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CMP, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. Appoint a Arbitrator as per Clause XXVII of the Joint Development Agreement dated 31.03.2011 as per Annexure-A in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The Joint Development Agreement entered into between the petitioner and the respondents governed by an arbitration in terms of clause (XXVII). The said clause reads as under:- - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42248 CMP No. 126 of 2025 “XXVII. ARBITRATION: In the event of any dispute that may arise between the owner and the developer, the same shall be referred to a Mediator agreed to by both the parties to arrive at a mutually agreed conclusion. In the absence of arriving at a conclusion then, the dispute shall be referred to arbitrators whose decision shall be final and binding upon the parties. Each of the party shall name his arbitrator and the said two arbitrators would be at liberty to nominate an umpire to proceed and to decide the dispute in accordance with the terms of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996.” 3. In terms of the above, it is required that the matter be referred to mediation agreed to by both the parties and only thereafter, the matter could be referred to arbitration. 4. Since the process of reference to mediator has not been complied with, the above petition stands dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to nominate a mediator to mediate the dispute between the parties. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE LN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 111