- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 306 OF 2024 BETWEEN: M/S SRI PATHY ASSOCIATES PVT LTD. CIVIL ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT 2013 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM DIRECTOR S SEKAR SON OF SUBRAMANIAM AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 62, THANGAPERUMAL STREET ERODE 638 001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARAN P SABARAD.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT PORT AND FISHERIES DIVISION 2ND FLOOR SHAMILL HALL, UDUPI 576 103 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF THE GOVERNMENT ANIMAL HUSBANDARY AND FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU 560 001 Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 3. THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES 3RD FLOOR PODIUM BLOCK VISHWESHWARAYA TOWER BENGALURU 560001 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS PORT AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING NORTH SIR M VISHWESWARAYA ROAD DHARWAD 585 101 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PORT AND INLAND WATER DEPARTMENT, BAITHKOL KARWAR 581302 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.LALITA P. M., HCGP FOR F1 TO R5) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION UNDER SEC.11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO REFER THE PARTIES ARBITRATION. II.APPOINT A RETIRED DISTRICT/HIGH COURT JUDGE OR ANY OTHER COMPETENT PERSON AS SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS AND THE PETITIONER IN TERMS OF THE CL. 4 OF SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT DATED 16-11-2015 AT ANNEXURE –B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 4 of the Special Conditions of contract dated 16.11.2015 at Annexure-B. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: 3. The petitioner is a class-1 contractor. The respondents have issued a tender notification wherein the petitioner participated in the tender process issued by the respondent authority for construction of breakwater/guide Bund adjacent to Quay of navigation Channel at Gangoli Fishing Harbour in Kundapur Taluk, Udupi District. Subsequently, the bid of the petitioner was accepted and approved at ₹1,00,38,61,787/-. The petitioner furnished a security - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 deposit and work site was belatedly handed over on 07.12.2015. As per contract conditions, work was completed within 48 months which was duly complied by the petitioner. The contract also stipulated the manner of submission of bills i.e., monthly bills consisting of the value of work completed less than cumulative amount previously paid. Despite this, the employer- respondent repeatedly made delayed payments without any consideration of the interest payable. Despite several representations made by the petitioner, the employer-respondent has failed to pay the accrued interest on delayed payment of RA bills, thereby causing heavy financial burden and losses to the petitioner. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause i.e., clause 4 of the Special Conditions of a Contract dated 16.11.2015 vide Annexure-G and issued an arbitration Notice on 05.03.2024 proposing the name of Sri. Basavaraj S Sappannavar, Retired Principal District Sessions Judge as an Arbitrator. The - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 respondents despite service of a notice, did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence, the petitioner is constrained to file this petition. 4. The respondents filed a statement of objections raising several contentions. It is contended that the claim made by the petitioner is a stale claim. Hence, there is no arbitral dispute arose between the petitioner and respondents. Hence, prays to dismiss the petition. 5. Heard Sri. Basavaraj Veerasangappa Sabarad, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, and learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. 6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has completed a work as per the terms and conditions of the Special Conditions of a contract dated 16.11.2015 vide Annexure-B, and submitted the bills. The respondents did not pay the bills. Hence, the dispute arose and there is an arbitration clause in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 the special conditions of a contract. The petitioners invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and conciliation Act on 05.03.2024. The respondents did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence, he submits that there exists an arbitral dispute and the dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. Hence, on these grounds, prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents submits that there is no arbitral dispute which arose between the parties to the petition and the respondents have already cleared all the dues. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the petition. 8. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 9. The point, that would arises for consideration is as follows: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the arbitral dispute to the arbitration in terms of clause 4 of the Special Conditions of a Contract dated 16.11.2015 vide Annexure–B as per the Provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules? 10. It is an undisputed fact that the respondents issued a tender notification and the petitioner participated in the tender process and the petitioner was the lowest bidder, and the respondents accepted the bid of the petitioner and executed a special conditions of a contract on 16.11.2025. The petitioner contended that the petitioner has completed the work within the stipulated time and submitted the bills. The respondents did not clear the dues. There is an arbitration clause in the special conditions of a contract dated 16.11.2015 vide Annexure-B, which reads as follows: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 4. Arbitration (Clause 24) 4.1: The procedure for arbitration shall be as follows: (a) In case of dispute or difference arising between the Employer and the Contractor relating to any matter arising out of or connected with this agreement it shall be settled in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. The disputes or differences shall be referred to a Sole Arbitrator. The Sole Arbitrator shall be appointed by agreement between the parties; failing such agreement, by the Appointing Authority (any one of the Organizations as per list enclosed in Annexure) (b) Arbitration proceedings shall be held at Mangalore, Karnataka, India. (c) The cost and expenses of arbitration proceedings will be paid as determined by the Arbitrator. However, the expenses incurred by each party in connection with the preparation, presentation, etc., shall be borne by each party itself. (d) Performance under the contract shall continue during the arbitration proceedings and payments due the Contractor by the Employer shall not be withheld, unless they are the subject matter of the arbitration proceedings. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 11. From the perusal of clause 4.1(a), it is clear that, in case any dispute or difference arises between the employer and the contractor, the dispute shall be resolved through an arbitration and shall be settled in accordance with the provisions of arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner invoked clause 4 of the Special Conditions of the Contract dated 16.11.2015 by issuing a notice dated 05.03.2024 as per Annexure-G. The respondents did not reply to the arbitration notice. 12. Thus, there is an arbitral dispute which arose between the petitioner and respondents, and the same shall be resolved through an arbitration as there exists an arbitration agreement between the parties. Though, the respondents have raised several grounds in the statement of objections, it is settled law that while considering a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, this Court is required to consider as to whether there exists an arbitration - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 agreement, and whether arbitral dispute arises between the parties to the petition. 13. In view of the above discussion, the petitioner has made out of the ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator. Accordingly, the point is answered in the affirmative. 14. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER i. The Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed. ii. Sri. Basavaraj S. Sappannavar, District Judge (retired) is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 4 of a special conditions of contract dated 16.11.2015 as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the Rules. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8880 CMP No. 306 of 2024 iii. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the learned arbitrator and the director of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru. iv. The Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy of the documents produced by the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same. v. Pending IA(s), if any, disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS