- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31124 WP No. 19785 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 19785 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: M/S SAINIK WELFARE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY (KARNATAKA) LIMITED, CA SITE NO.16(P) EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT, 3RD 'D' MAIN, 2ND 'G' CROSS, BEHIND SAIL, VIJINAPURA DOORAVANINAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SMT SHANTHA MARY R …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S SANTHOSH NARAYAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (LC) O/O CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL, KARNATAKA CIRCLE, BENGALURU 560 001 2. THE MANAGER, MAIL MOTOR SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NO.4, BASAVESHWARA ROAD, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31124 WP No. 19785 of 2025 BENGALURU 560052 3. THE REGISTRAR INDIA INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE, PLOT NO 6, VASANT KUNJ INSTITUTIONAL AREA, MAHIPALPUR, NEW DELHI, DELHI 110070 4. MR. VIKAS MAHENDRA, PARTNER, KEYSTONE PARTNERS, ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS, NO. 35/2, 2ND FLOOR, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU 560052 …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE APPOINTMENT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE LETTER DATED 09/05/2025 ANNEXURE-L TO THIS WRIT PETITION; QUASH THE CONSTITUTION, COMMENCEMENT AND CONTINUATION OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL HEADED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN ARB 001/2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-M TO THIS WRIT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31124 WP No. 19785 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner's cause, when stated in brief, is that it has offered certain services to the second respondent which is called upon to pay a certain compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and that the second respondent proposes to pass on this liability to the petitioner with the initiation of arbitral proceedings. Mr. S. Santhosh Narayan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court must intervene under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because demonstrably the claim against the petitioner is belated by over six and a half years and that the constitution of the Tribunal is also not as is required in law. However, this Court must observe that these are all grounds that would be available to the petitioner in the arbitral proceedings, and therefore, there is no occasion for this Court to intervene at the very initial stage under Article 226 of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31124 WP No. 19785 of 2025 Constitution of India. As such, the petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to raise all grounds in the arbitral proceedings. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB