- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53022 CMP No. 496 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 496 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. MUNISHAMAPPA SRINIVASA S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT 109 GROUND FLOOR, SIRI TIMBER LEAF APARTMENTS 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, HANUMAHALLI LAYOUT, AREHALLI, BANGALORE-560061 DESIGNATED PARTNER OF M/S. ARYAA POULTRY BREEDERS FARM LLP 2. MANJUNATHA GOWDA M S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, ABBENAHALLI, MADIVALA POST, KASABA HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT -563130, PARTNER - M/S. ARYAA POULTRY BREEDERS FARM LLP …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VENKATESH KUMAR S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. LATHA M D/O MR. MUNIMARAPPA, W/O. GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.855/A, GAGANA 2ND MAIN ROAD, CHINNANNA LAYOUT, KAVAL BYRASANDRA, BANGALORE- 560032. PARTNER - M/S. ARYAA POULTRY BREEDERS FARM LLP 2. K S NALINI D/O MR. KOMMERAHALLI LINGEGOWDA W/O. KRISHNA SATHYANARAYANA, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53022 CMP No. 496 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.15, SREEKANTESHWARA NILAYA, 1ST A MAIN, 11TH CROSS, BEHIND BHARATHI HOSPITAL, PRASHANTH NAGAR, BANGALORE-560079. DESIGNATED PARTNER OF M/S. ARYAA POULTRY BREEDERS FARM LLP 3. GOVINDAPPA M S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.855/A, GAGANA 2ND MAIN ROAD, CHINNANNA LAYOUT, KAVAL BYRASANDRA, BANGALORE- 560032. GUARANTOR OF M/S. ARYAA POULTRY BREEDERS FARM LLP 4. ARYAA POULTRY BREEDERS FARM LLP LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED UNDER THE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT 2008. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT FLAT NO.109, SIRI TIMBER LEAF APARTMENT, GF 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN, HANUMAHALLI BADAVANE, AREHALLI, BANGALORE 560061 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.S.RAJENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4) THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996., PRAYING TO EXERCISE ITS POWERS UNDER SEC.11(4) AND 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, AND ISSUE NECESSARY DIRECTIONS FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A SOLE ARBITRATION TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS AND THE RESPONDENTS IN CONNECTION WITH LLP AGREEMENT DATED 4.02.2021 AS PER CLAUSE 43 AT ANNEXURE - A AS ENUMERATED IN THE NOTICE INVOKING ARBITRATION DATED 13.06.2025 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONERS AND SUCH OTHER CONTRACTUAL DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THIS CMP, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53022 CMP No. 496 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Exercise its powers under sec.11(4) and 11(6) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, and issue necessary directions for the appointment of a sole arbitration to adjudicate the disputes between the petitioners and the respondents in connection with LLP agreement dated 4.02.2021 as per clause 43 at Annexure - A as enumerated in the notice invoking arbitration dated 13.06.2025 issued by the petitioners and such other contractual disputes between the parties. b. Pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioners and respondents No.1 and 2 had entered into LLP agreement on 4.02.2021 which is governed by an arbitration clause in terms of clause (43), which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference: Arbitration 1. All the matters not expressly provided in this agreement shall be decided by the consent of all the Partners in writing. Falling that all disputes and questions about and In connection with the LLP under this Agreement arising between the Partners or between any one of them and the legal representative of the Partners or with the LLP at any time and from time to time, shall be settled by conciliation r by arbitration as provided - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53022 CMP No. 496 of 2025 under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as if the parties to the dispute have consented in writing for determination of the same as aforesaid and the provisions of the said Act apply accordingly. 2. If any question arises whether the dispute relates to formation, management or business of the LLP, the question shall be referred to the arbitrator, whose decision thereon shall be final.- 3. The petitioners had issued a notice on 13.06.2025 to respondents No.1, 2 and 4 , contending that there is a certain misappropriation of monies, damages, and losses have been caused to the petitioners, and as such, nominated an arbitrator. The respondent replied on 12.07.2025 , denying all the allegations. It is in that background that the petitioner is before this Court seeking the aforesaid reliefs. 4. Notice having been issued, respondents have entered an appearance. Sri.M.S.Rajendra, learned counsel for the respondents, would submit that the respondents have no objection to the appointment of an arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes between the petitioners and respondent Nos . 1 and 2, who are - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53022 CMP No. 496 of 2025 the parties to the LLP, but, opposes the same in so far is respondents No.3 and 4 are concerned. Learned counsel for the petitioner would, however, contend that respondent No.3 is the husband of respondent No.1. He is a partner in respondent No.4 who is a guarantor to the loans availed of by the LLP and in that view of the matter, they are required to be made as parties to the aforesaid proceedings. 5. His submission is that an account of the actions of respondents Nos . 3 and 4, losses have been caused to the LLP. 6. Heard Sri.Venkatesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.M.S.Rajendra, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 4. Perused papers. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents, the short question that would arise for consideration is, whether the Arbitral proceedings could be continued in respect of respondents No.3 and 4? - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53022 CMP No. 496 of 2025 8. Admittedly, respondents No.3 and 4 are not parties to the agreement. The allegations made against them are that LLP has suffered damages and losses on account of the actions of respondents No.3 and 4. Even if the LLP had suffered any damages, it would be for the LLP to recover such damages or losses from respondent No.4. Therefore, respondent No.3 cannot be made a party to the arbitration. 9. At this stage, both the counsels submit that the matter may be first referred to mediation and if the same were to be unsuccessful, the disputes could be arbitrated. 10. In that view of the matter, I pass the following: ORDER i) CMP is partly allowed insofar as respondents No.1, 2 and 4 and dismissed against respondent No.3. ii) The matter is referred to mediation. The Director, Karnataka Mediation Centre to appoint a mediator to resolve the dispute between the parties. The parties are directed to appear - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53022 CMP No. 496 of 2025 before the Director, Karnataka Mediation Centre on 12.01.2026 at 02.30 p.m. iii) In the event of mediation being successful, the successful mediation report to be placed before this Court. iv) In the event of mediation not being successful, the Director, Mediation Centre, is directed to forward the copy of the file to the Director, Arbitration and Conciliation Centre. v) Shri.Justice P.Krishna Bhat, former Judge of this Court is appointed as a sole arbitrator to arbitrate the dispute between the parties under the aegis of the Arbitration Centre attached to this Court. vi) All contentions are kept open. vii) Registry is directed to return the original and/or certified copies, if produced, to the respective parties who have produced it/them by following due procedure. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE LN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70