Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 44085 (KAR)

M/S EMJAY ENGINEERING COMPANY AND v. M/S. CONFIDENT PROJECT (INDIA) LTD

CMP/97/2026 · 2026-10-06

H T Narendra Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010144332026 NC: 2026:KHC:55751 CMP No. 97 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 97 OF 2026 BETWEEN: M/S EMJAY ENGINEERING COMPANY AND M/S JAYEM ENGINEERING COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.70, 1ST CROSS 2ND A MAIN DOMLUR LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 071. REP. BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR/CEO SHRI. PJ JACOB AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS S/O SHRI CHACKO OUSEPH. .…PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVEENDRAN P., ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. CONFIDENT PROJECT (INDIA) LTD (A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT 1956) REGD. OFFICE AT NO.574 PARK HOUSE, 80 FEET ROAD 8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560095 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. KRISHIKA G VAISHNAV, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A MAHESH CHOWDHARY., ADVOCATE) Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010144332026 NC: 2026:KHC:55751 CMP No. 97 of 2026 THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT PRAYING TO APPOINT SHRI. V.N. RAVINDRA, DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (RETD), WHO IS IN THE PANEL OF THE ARBITRATORS OR ANY RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE IN THE PANEL OF ARBITRATORS AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR ASSISTED BY PETITIONER AND OFFICER OF RESPONDENT IN ADJUDICATING THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE CONTRACTUAL WORKS ENTRUSTED BY RESPONDENT AS PER CLAUSE NO. 32 UNDER AGREEMENT DATED 23.09.2008 WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 15.11.2007 ENTERED INTO WITH M/S. JAYEM ENGINEERING COMPANY DATED 23.09.2008 IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection, stating that, the petitioner is invoking the arbitration clause in relation to two different agreements which are not interconnected and it has not addressed any separate notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Therefore, the petition is not maintainable. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010144332026 NC: 2026:KHC:55751 CMP No. 97 of 2026 invoke the appropriate arbitration clause, in accordance with law. 3. The memo is taken on record. 4. This petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause, in accordance with law. (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 80 Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA