- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45629 CMP No. 116 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 116 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI.PRABHAKAR S S/O H M SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.433/D, REDTREE GRAND, G1, 7TH B MAIN ROAD, 9TH CROSS, NARAYANANAGAR 3RD BLOCK, DODDAKALLASANDRA, BENGALURU-560062 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH PRASAD R.,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. SANJAY SURYANARAYANA 433C, REDTREE CLASSIC, FLAT T1, 7TH B MAIN, 9TH CROSS, NARAYANANAGAR 3RD BLOCK, DODDAKALLASANDRA, BENGALURU-560062 …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO EXERCISE THE POWERS UNDER SEC. 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AND REFER THE DISPUTE TO THE ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED IN CLAUSE NO. 15 OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DATED 27/10/2023 PRODUCED AT "ANNEXURE D" TO ANY Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45629 CMP No. 116 of 2025 PERSON QUALIFIED TO CONDUCT ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS, PREFERABLY BY A RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE AT BANGALORE OR AT ARBITRATION CENTRE, BANGALORE, AS MAY BE DECIDED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT AND ALSO PASS SUCH OTHER DIRECTIONS OR ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM IT FIT AND NECESSARY IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND 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: To exercise the powers Under Sec. 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and refer the dispute to the Arbitration as provided in Clause No. 15 of the Agreement of Sale dated 27/10/2023 produced at "ANNEXURE D" to any person qualified to conduct arbitration proceedings, preferably by a retired District Judge at Bangalore or at Arbitration Centre, Bangalore, as may be decided by this Hon'ble Court to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen between the Petitioner and Respondent and also pass such other directions or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem it fit and necessary in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of Justice and equity. 2. 2. The notice which had been issued by the petitioner under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has not been served on the respondent. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45629 CMP No. 116 of 2025 The reason for the same is not far to see inasmuch as the address given of the respondent is the same as that of the petitioner where the petitioner is residing. Hence, the question of service of notice on the respondent either of the Section 21 notice or of the present petition would not arise. It is rather shocking that a court notice has been stated to have been served on the respondent. The reason for that also cannot be far to see inasmuch as it could have only been received by the petitioner who is residing at that address. In that view of the matter, the above petition being an abuse of the process of court, the petition is dismissed. 3. Though it is a fit case for imposing of costs, I refrain from doing so. 4. Registry is directed to return the original and/or certified copies, if produced, to the respective parties - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45629 CMP No. 116 of 2025 who have produced it/them by following due procedure. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE PRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67