- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 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. 690 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S ATHULYA ASSISTED LIVING PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT NO.40, NORTH PHASE, 5TH CROSS STREET, KALAIMAGAL NAGAR, EKKATHUTHANGAL, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU-600 032 BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR. K V MADHUSUDHAN HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT NO. 28, R. NARAYANAPURA VARTHUR MAIN ROAD BEHIND MANIPAL HOSPITALS PALM MEADOWS, WHITEFIELD BENGALURU 560 066. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LAKAMAPURMATH CHIDANANDAYYA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 AND: DR. RANJANA S PRASAD FOUNDER AND CEO M/S.BELVAA SENIOR CARE PRIVATE LIMITED NO.19/2, PALM MEADOWS, OPP: NEXUS WHITEFIELD MALL, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU 560 066. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DR. SHYAM PRASAD T.S., ADVOCATE) (VK NOT FILED) THIS CMP IS FILED U/S. 11(5) AND (6) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT THE ARBITRATOR FOR THE RESPONDENT, ENABLING BOTH THE ARBITRATORS TO CONSTITUTE THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL OF THREE ARBITRATORS IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 18 OF THE LETTER OF ENGAGEMENT DATED 27.09.2024, ANNEXURE A TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER This petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’ for short) seeking an appointment of the Arbitrators for resolving the dispute between parties to the petition in terms of clause 18 of the letter of engagement dated 27.09.2024 vide Annexure A. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this civil miscellaneous petition are as follows: 2.1. The petitioner is a Company established or the purpose of providing geriatric care and assisted leaving services to the senior citizens and to provide care and accommodation to the senior citizens. The respondent being a Doctor was appointed as the Consultant-cum- Regional Medical Officer and was required to discharge her duties in the facility of the petitioner Company at Whitefield, Bengaluru with a specific contract prohibiting the respondent from soliciting and inducing the customers - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 and employees of the petitioner Company. The letter of engagement was entered into on 27.09.2024. On 02.04.2025, the respondent tendered the resignation to the petitioner Company and subsequently, the petitioner Company accepted the resignation of the respondent. Further, the respondent incorporated and established accompany by name ‘M/s Belvaa Senior Care Private Limited’ providing the services similar to that of the petitioner Company. On 09.04.2025 the petitioner Company issued the relieving letter, relieving the respondent from the duty. The respondent went ahead of collecting the patient details based on the hospital registration number at the facility of the petitioner company at Whitefield, Bengaluru. The respondent also asked the staff of the petitioner Company to leave the petitioner Company and to join with her. On 19.08.2025, the petitioner issued a legal notice calling upon the respondent to desist from carrying on the similar business and from soliciting and inducing the employees and also - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 invoked the arbitration clause by proposing the name of the Arbitrator. However, the respondent though replied vide reply dated 29.08.2025, did not agree for the appointment of the learned Arbitrator. 3. The petitioner also filed an arbitration application in AA No. 32 of 2025 under Section 9 of the Act seeking an order of injunction restraining the respondent from carrying out the similar business and from soliciting and inducing the customers and employees. The Trial Court by order dated 08.10.2025, passed an order of injunction restraining the respondent from carrying out the similar business and from soliciting and inducing the customers and employees. 4. The petitioner sent a rejoinder to the reply dated 29.08.2025 on 07.11.2025 again invoking the arbitration clause and proposed the name of the Arbitrator. But, the respondent did not concur in appointing the Arbitrator. Hence, this petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the letter of engagement at Annexure A having been entered into by the parties to the petition, the arbitral dispute arose and the petitioner has invoked the arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice under Section 21 of the act. The agreement contains the arbitration clause and the dispute has to be resolved through arbitration. Accordingly, on these grounds, prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that no arbitral dispute arose between the parties to the petition and as such, the matter may not be referred to the arbitration. Accordingly , prays to dismiss the appeal. 8. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 9. The point that would arise for consideration is as follows: Whether the petitioner had made out aground to refer the dispute to the arbitration in term of clause 18 of the letter of engagement dated 27.09.2024 vide Annexure A as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules? 10. It is undisputed that the letter of engagement was entered into between the parties to the petition on 27.09.2024 vide Annexure A. The respondent was appointed as the Consultant-cum-Regional Medical Officer at petitioner’s facility. Further, the respondent tendered the resignation and started the similar Company similar to that of the petitioner’s Company. The respondent went ahead of collecting the patient details based on the hospital registration number at the facility of the petitioner company at Whitefield, Bengaluru. The respondent also asked the staff of the petitioner Company to leave the petitioner Company and to join with her. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 11. The petitioner issued a legal notice invoking arbitration clause, however the respondent though replied did not agree with the petitioner for the appointment of the Arbitrators. The petitioner issued a rejoinder to the reply submitted by the respondent again invoking the arbitration clause. But, the respondent did not concur with the petitioner in appointing the Arbitrators. 12. I have perused the arbitration clause at clause 18 of the letter of engagement which reads as follows: “18. Dispute Resolution In the event of any claim, dispute or differences among or between any of the Parties ("Disputing Parties") arising out of, in connection with or relating to this engagement letter, or the breach, termination or invalidity hereof ("Dispute"), then such Dispute shall be resolved as set out below. a) Any Disputing Party may by notice in writing ("Arbitration Notice") to the other Disputing Parties refer the Dispute for resolution to arbitration in the Jurisdiction of Bangalore/Karnataka in effect at the time of issuance of the Arbitration Notice and the seat - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 of arbitration shall be Karnataka and the venue shall be Bangalore. b) The arbitral tribunal will, subject to the following provisions, consist of 1 (One) arbitrator who is to be agreed by the Disputing Parties within 10 (Ten) days of receipt of the Arbitration Notice. c) If the Disputing Parties fail to agree on the arbitrator within 10 (Ten) days of receipt of the notice for arbitration, then the arbitral tribunal shall consist of 3 (Three) arbitrators who shall be appointed as per SIAC Rules. d) The arbitration shall be conducted in the English language and in confidence. e) The arbitration award shall be binding on the parties and the award shall be enforceable by the courts specified in Clause 18. f) The determination of the arbitral tribunal will be final and binding on all Parties for all purposes. g) Each Disputing Party must bear its own costs in connection with any Dispute, provided however that: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 i. All interim expenses or fees payable to arbitrators or institutions conducting an arbitration must be shared equally by the Disputing Parties; and ii. Insofar as the rules of the arbitration permit, the arbitral tribunal where may award costs as part of its determination, in which case, such determination will (notwithstanding the foregoing) prevail.” 13. From the perusal of the aforementioned arbitration clause, it is clear that, if any claim, dispute or difference arises among the parties regarding the engagement letter, the same shall be referred to the arbitration and the arbitration to consist one Arbitrator if agreed upon within 10 days of the receipt of the arbitration notice. If the parties fail to agree within 10 days, the Arbitral Tribunal consist of 3 Arbitrators. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause and the dispute arose between the parties to the petition which is arbitral in nature and the petitioner has invoked the arbitration - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 clause by issuing an arbitration notice and rejoinder to the reply. 14. It is also pertinent to note that, as required by clause 18 of the engagement letter, the parties did not agree for the appointment of the arbitrator within 10 days of the receipt of notice. For the foregoing discussion, the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the Tripartite Arbitration. Accordingly, I answer the point in the affirmative. 15. In the result, the following: ORDER A. The CMP is allowed. B. Hon’ble Shri Justice A.N.Venugopala Gowda, and Hon’ble Shri Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar, Former Judges of this Court are appointed as the Arbitrators to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition. C. Both the Arbitrators are directed to nominate the umpire/third Arbitrator in terms of clause 18 of the letter of engagement dated - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10032 CMP No. 690 of 2025 27.09.2024 vide Annexure A as per the provisions of the Act. D. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the learned Arbitrator and the Director of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru. E. Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy of the documents produced by the parties, if any, after retaining the photocopies of the same. F. Pending IA(s), if any, disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA [ONLINE] CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 94