- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 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. 459 OF 2023 BETWEEN: THE GAVIPURAM EXTENSION HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.50, 3RD CROSS, GAVIPURAM EXTENSION BENGALURU-560 019, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY MR. K.GOPINATH …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANANDA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S S R M ENTERPRISES NO.1947, LUMINOUS STAR 6TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN, BENGALURU -560060 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS SRI. SUBHASHCHANDRA 2. SRI. SUBHASHCHANDRA S/O THIMMAIAH K.G. AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS THE MANAGING PARTNER OF M/S S.R.M. ENTERPRISES NO.1947, LUMINOUS STAR 6TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN BENGALURU-560 060 ALSO R/AT NO.572, 2ND MAIN ROAD, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN, BENGALURU-560 060 Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 3. SRI. RAGHU S/O. LATE RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS THE PARTNER OF M/S. S.R.M. ENTERPRISES NO. 1947, LUMINOUS STAR 6TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN BENGALURU 560 060 4. SRI. K.R. MURTHY S/O. RAMAPPA C. AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS THE PARTNER OF M/S. S.R.M. ENTERPRISES NO. 1947, LUMINOUS STAR 6TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN BENGALURU 560 060 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR SANGANAGOUDA., ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 SERVED, REP. BY R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 06.02.2026 SERVICE OF NOTICE ON R1 R3 AND R4 HELD SUFFICIENT) THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER HAS FILED THE ABOVE CIVIL MISC. PETITION UNDER SEC.11(5) AND (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO APPOINT THE SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS PER CLAUSE 32 OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING / AGREEMENT DATED 14/09/2016 AT ANNEXURE-A AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER 1. The Petitioner society filed this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) for the appointment of an arbitrator for resolving the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 32 of the Memorandum of Understanding/Agreement dated 14.09.2016 vide Annexure-A. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: 3. The petitioner society, to form new residential layout for the benefit of its members, searching for suitable lands and at that point of time, the partner of respondent No.1 firm approached the petitioner society, and agreed to procure the land, and form a residential layout duly following all the procedure within the time bound limit. Accordingly, after detailed negotiations, the petitioner society entered into a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 memorandum of understanding/agreement with the respondents dated 14.09.2016. As per the terms and conditions of the MOU/agreement, the respondents have agreed to complete the work within 9 months from the date of execution of MOU/agreement and they have received ₹1.00 crore as advance on 14.09.2016. 4. The respondents agreed to complete the said work within the stipulated period. However, the respondents went on postponing on one or the other pretext. The respondents have received a sum of ₹ 3,15,00,000/- from the petitioner society, but they failed to fulfil the terms and conditions of MOU/Agreement. As per clause 32 of MOU/Agreement, there is a provision for arbitration. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, on two occasions i.e., on 27.12.2021 and 25.04.2022 respectively. The said notice was served on respondent - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 No.1. Respondent No.1 did not reply to the said notice nor fulfilled the terms and conditions of MOU. Hence, the petitioner was constrained to file this petition. 5. Respondent No.2, despite granting the sufficient opportunity, has not filed a statement of objections. Hence, the statement of objections is taken as nil. 6. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel for the respondent No. 2. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the respondents have entered into MOU/Agreement and the respondents have committed a breach of terms and conditions of contract. There exists an arbitration agreement. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice under Section 21 of the Act of 1996. Respondent No.1 despite receipt of notice, respondent No.1 did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence, he submits that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 arbitral dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent, and there is an arbitration clause. The said dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the petition. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no arbitral dispute which arises between the parties to the petition. Hence there is no question of nominating the arbitrator to resolve the alleged arbitral dispute between the parties to the petition. Hence, on this ground, prays to dismiss the petition. 9. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel to the parties. 10. The point, that arises for consideration is as follows: “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to arbitral dispute to refer the arbitration in terms of clause 32 of MOU dated 14.09.2016 as per the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” 11. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and respondents have entered into a memorandum of understanding/agreement dated 14.09.2016. The respondents have committed a breach of terms and conditions of MOU/Agreement. There is an arbitration clause at clause 32 in the MOU/Agreement, which reads as follows: 32. Arbitration: All the disputes or differences of opinion whatsoever which may at any time arise between the parties in respect of anything contained I this MOU/Agreement or as to the rights and liabilities and entitlement of the parties or the schedule property or as to the interpretation of any terms of this MOU/Agreement shall be settled amicably. In the event of the dispute not amicably settled, the same shall be referred to the sole Arbitrator in accordance with Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The parties herein shall abide by the decision of the Arbitration and the same shall be final and binding on both the parties. The parties agree for the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 proceedings shall be held at Bangalore and in English language. 12. From the perusal of arbitration clause, it is clear that, if any dispute arises between the parties to the MOU/Agreement, the dispute shall be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner, invoking the arbitration clause, issued an arbitration notice on 25.04.2022 vide Annexure-F, proposing the name of an arbitrator. A Notice was served on respondent No.1. Despite the service of notice, respondent No.1 did not reply to the arbitration notice nor concurred with the name proposed by the petitioner. 13. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause in the MOU/Agreement and the dispute arises between the parties to the petition and the same shall be resolved through an arbitration. Thus, the petitioner has made out of ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator. In view of the above discussion, I answer the point in the ‘affirmative’. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 14. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER i. The Civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. ii. Smt. Premavathi Managoli, District Judge (retired) is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 32 of the MOU/Agreement dated 14.09.2016 as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and Rules. iii. All contentions of the parties are kept open. iv. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the learned arbitrator and the director of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru. v. The Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy of the documents produced by the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8878 CMP No. 459 of 2023 vi. Pending IA(s), if any, disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS