Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89448 (KAR)

MR. SRINIVAS G PATEL v. M/S SRI SAI GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED

CMP/177/2024 · 2025-12-12

Suraj Govindaraj

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53667 CMP No. 177 of 2024 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. 177 OF 2024 BETWEEN: MR. SRINIVAS G PATEL S/O LATE GOVINDARAJU M R AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO 7, MARAPPA THOATA 2ND CROSS, J C NAGAR, BANGALORE 560006 HAVING OFFICE AT M/S APEX TRADERS NO 4, C/O PATELS INN, 38/2/2 15TH CROSS, 2ND BLOCK, R T NAGAR BANGALORE 560032 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NARAYANA SWAMY P M., ADVOCATE) AND: M/S SRI SAI GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI R ANAND S/O D V R RAGHAVAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT D NO 35A SUNDARAM STREET, STUARTPET ARAKKONAM, VELLORE DISTRICT 631001 TAMIL NADU HAVING THE GRANITE ROUGH BLOCKS QUARRY AT SY NO 199 AND 444 DIGUVAPALEM AND GUNDLAPALLI VILLAGE THAMBALLAPALLI MADNAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. … RESPONDENT THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, TO A) APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE EXISTING DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES HEREIN IN TERMS OF THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE 13 CONTAINED IN THE PRODUCTION CUM TRADING AGREEMENT OF ROUGH BLOCK DATED 30.5.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53667 CMP No. 177 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, 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 an Arbitrator to resolve the existing dispute between the parties herein in terms of the arbitration clause 13 contained in the production cum trading agreement of rough block dated 30.5.2019 vide annexure-A. b) And grant such other and further reliefs in the ends of justice. 2. None appears for the petitioner. 3. Despite the order dated 28.11.2025, neither the process fee has been paid nor is there any appearance on the part of the petitioner. 4. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 121