Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 91326 (KAR)

U. NARASIMHA MURTHY v. U NARAYANA MURTHY

CMP/200/2022 · 2025-12-12

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54036 CMP No. 200 of 2022 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. 200 OF 2022 BETWEEN: U. NARASIMHA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O. LATE N. UGRAIAH, CHAIRMAN, M/S NARAYANA ELECTRICALS SOLUTIONS LTD NO.69, 1ST FLOOR, 4TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, S.G.NAGAR, BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE-560079 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M, ADVOCATE) AND: U NARAYANA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O. LATE N. UGRAIAH, MANAGING DIRECTOR NARAYANA ELECTRICAL SOLUTIONS LTD., NO.69, 1ST FLOOR, 4TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, S.G.NAGAR, BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE-560079 …RESPONDENT THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11(6) AND 14 OF THE ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO EXERCISE THE POWER UNDER SECTIONS 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AS ANNEXURE-A AGREEMENT DTD: 21.04.2011 AND APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE THAT HAS ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT AND FOR SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MAY DEEM FIT AND PROPER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54036 CMP No. 200 of 2022 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: Wherefore, the petitioner pray that this Hon'ble Chief Justice may be pleased to exercise the power under sections 11(6) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 as annexure-a agreement dtd: 21.04.2011 and appoint a sole arbitrator adjudicate the dispute that has arisen between the petitioner and the respondent and for such other reliefs as the Hon'ble chief justice may deem fit and proper, in the interest of justice and equity. 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.: 92