- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32659-DB WP No. 18413 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 18413 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. DEVELOPERS GROUP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT A-87 BASEMENT, LAJPAT NAGAR 2, NEW DELHI 110024 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRASANTH V G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MSK SHELTERS A PARTNERSHIP REGISTERED UNDER THE PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932 NO. 2, MSK SQUARE, CT BED EXTENSION, BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560070 2. SRI SURESH KUMAR M., S/O LATE MUNISHAMY, LEGAL HEIR OF DECEASED PARTNER MRS. REKHA.M AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32659-DB WP No. 18413 of 2026 R/AT No.471.16, 39TH C CROSS, 10TH MAIN, JAYANAGARA 5TH BLOCK, BANGALORE-560 041. 3. MR. RAVIKUMAR D., S/O DALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 34, YEDUMUDU, KAGALLA HALLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA TALUK, KARNATAKA - 562112 4. MS. POOJA M.S., D/O MR. SURESH KUMAR M. AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.471.16, 39TH C CROSS, 10TH MAIN, JAYANAGARA, 5TH BLOCK, BANGALORE 560041 5. MS. NEETU M.S., D/O MR. SURESH KUMAR M. LEGAL HEIR OF DECEASED PARTNER MRS. REKHA M, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 471.16, 39TH C CROSS, 10TH MAIN, JAYANAGARA, 5TH BLOCK, BANGALORE 560041 6. SMT. INDIRA, W/O LATE DR. SHANKARNARAYANA RESIDING AT NO. 49, KK GARDEN, DEVARABEESANAHALLI, SARJAPURA ORR, BANGALORE-560103 7. SRI. SHASHANK, S/O LATE DR. SHANKARNARAYANA, RESIDING AT NO. 49, KK GARDEN, DEVARABEESANAHALLI, SARJAPURA ORR, BANGALORE-560103 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32659-DB WP No. 18413 of 2026 8. MS. KAVYA S.N. D/O LATE DR. SHANKARNARAYANA RESIDING AT NO. 49, KK GARDEN, DEVARABEESANAHALLI, SARJAPURA ORR, BANGALORE-560103 9. CAV INFRA LLP A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP REGISTERED UNDER THE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT, 2008 B-205 2ND FLOOR, DURGA RAINBOW, NEW MORE MEGASTORE, OUTER RING ROAD, MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU - 560048 10. RAMU NAGABATHINI F-103, MANTRI PARADISE, OPPOSITE RELIANCE MART, ARAKARE SIGNAL, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 076 11. SRIBATSHA RATH, S/O. MADHUSUDHAN RATH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT ALAT No.A/104, KOKILA GARDEN PHASE-2, POKITARIPUT, BHUVANESHWAR, ORISSA-751 020. 12. MRS. MADHAVI PHADNIS RATH W/O SAMBIT RATH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 48, YASH CLASSIC ENCLAVE, HENNUR CROSS, CHELLAKERE, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560043. 13. MR SAMBIT RATH, S/O SRINIVAS RATH RATH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32659-DB WP No. 18413 of 2026 RESIDING AT NO. 48, YASH CLASSIC ENCLAVE, HENNUR CROSS, CHELLAKERE, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU 560043. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT ALL THE RELEVANT PARTIES, INCLUDING THE PARTIES TO THE INSTANT PROCEEDINGS, TO APPROACH THE JURISDICTIONAL CIVIL COURT TO HAVE THE ENTIRETY OF THE DISPUTES COMPOSITELY ADJUDICATED INSTEAD OF PROCEEDING WITH ARBITRATION CASE NO.211/2021, THE MANDATE OF WHICH HAS IN ANY CASE EXPIRED, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with the following prayers: "i. To direct all the relevant parties, including the parties to the instant proceedings, to approach the jurisdictional civil court to have the entirety of the disputes compositely adjudicated instead of proceedings with Arbiration Case No.211/2021, the mandate of which has in any case expired or; ii. Alternatively, direct the Hon'ble Arbitral Tribunal (if the mandate of the Tribunal gets further extended under Section 29A of the Arbitration Act) to limit the scope of adjudication in Arbitration Case No.211/2021 to monetary claims/counter-claims between Respondents herein, So that potential inconsistent orders from multiple fora in respect of issues concerning - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32659-DB WP No. 18413 of 2026 title/ownership/transfer of the subject property or parts thereof are avoided, or; iii. Alternatively, lay down any such other clarifications/directions/guidelines which will ensure that the parties and judicial for a concerned with the instant dispute have guidance on how to proceed forward in the matter, and iv. pass such orders and further orders and or directions as this Hon'ble Court deem fit, proper and necessary in the interest of justice and equity." 2. The petitioner is a respondent in Arbitration Case No.211/2021, which is pending before the Sole Arbitrator, Justice A. Chandrashekar (Retd.). It appears that the statutory mandate of the Arbitrator has expired and the application is pending for extending of the mandate. 3. Mr. Dhyan Chinnappa, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr Prashant V G., learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of the arbitration is land property measuring around 45 acres situated at Chikkasagarahalli Village, Nandi Hobli, Chikkaballapura District. The said land property is the subject matter of several pending proceedings before the competent Civil Court. The submission is that the arbitration is not the appropriate forum to decide the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32659-DB WP No. 18413 of 2026 disputes regarding the said property where several civil proceedings are pending in respect of the said property. 4. Learned Senior counsel places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Vidya Drolia and Others Vs. Durga Trading Corporation (2021) 2 SCC 1. 5. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 6. Once parties have agreed under an agreement to invoke the arbitration in the event of differences or disputes arising between them under an agreement, all questions are to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal. Whether the Arbitral Tribunal would be competent to decide the question has to be determined by the Arbitral Tribunal itself. This Court will not interfere with the power of the Arbitral Tribunal to decide whether a dispute is such that it can be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal or whether it cannot decide the dispute. 7. Be that as it may, as of today, there are no arbitration proceedings inasmuch as the mandate of the Arbitrator has expired and an application for the extension of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32659-DB WP No. 18413 of 2026 this mandate is pending before the competent court. We, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the arbitral proceedings in this writ petition and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner may take recourse to any other remedy that may be available to him under the law, if so advised. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE RKA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9