- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 119 OF 2024 BETWEEN: M/S GLOBE DETECTIVE AGENCY PVT. LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED ADDRESS AT NO.601-603, EROS APARTMENTS, 56, NEHRU PLACE NEW DELHI INDIA-110019 ALSO HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT NO.102-103, MONEY CENTRE, 121, 7TH BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, KORAMANGALA. BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560095 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR PUNEET KUMAR S/O LATE MR. PREM KUMAR …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MILASH ARROL NORONHA., ADV.) AND: SMT. YASHODHA VENKATESH W/O SRI. VENKATESH RESIDING AT NO.2-50(B) Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 KANKANADY HOUSE, KADUBETTA POST, KADUBETTA VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT KARNATAKA ALSO AVAILABLE AT NO.307, 2ND FLOOR,EBONY BLOCK ST. JOHN’S WOOD APARTMENT, TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD BANGALORE, KARNATAKA-560029 …RESPONDENT (V/O DTD. 09.01.2026 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THE CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO NOMINATE AND APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS WITH RESPECT TO THE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT ARISING OUT OF THE LEAVE AND LICENSE AGREEMENT DATED 14.03.2014 AS PER THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT IN CLAUSE 8.13 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE A, GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEM FIT TO GRANT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ABOVE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioner filed this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’), to appoint a Sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and the respondents arising out of the leave and license agreement dated 14.03.2014 as per the arbitration agreement in clause 8.13 vide Annexure-A. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: The petitioner and respondent executed a leave cum license agreement on 14.03.2014. Addendum to leave and license agreement was executed on 01.08.2014 between the petitioner and respondent. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.4/2017 on the file of learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mysuru. The respondent filed an application under Section 8 of the Act of 1996 alleging that there is an - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 arbitration clause. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court. The respondent preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.20052/2019. The said writ petition was partly allowed vide order dated 20.04.2022 and I.ANo.2 was remanded for fresh adjudication. The petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.3 to withdraw the suit with a liberty to invoke arbitration clause in the said suit. I.A.No.3 was allowed. The legal notice was issued to the respondent as per the provisions of Section 11 of the Act of 1996 invoking an arbitration clause on 22.01.2024. The said notice was duly served on the respondent. The respondent did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence, this petition. 3. A notice was issued to the respondent. Despite the service of notice, the respondent remained unrepresented. 4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the arbitral dispute arose between the parties to the petition after having entered into the leave and license agreement. He submits that the petitioner invoked arbitration clause by issuing arbitral notice. Therefore, the matter has to be referred to the arbitration. Hence, on these grounds, prays to allow the petition. 6. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. The point, that would arise for consideration is as follows: “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator in terms of clause No.8.13 of the Leave and License Agreement dated 14.03.2014 as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 8. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and the respondent have entered into leave cum license agreement on 14.03.2014 and addendum to the leave cum license agreement was executed on 01.08.2014. I have Perused the leave and license agreement. 9. The petitioner has produced the leave and license agreement, which discloses that there is an arbitration clause i.e., clause No.8.13, which reads as follows: 8.13. MISCELLENEOUS: This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of India without regard for conflicts of laws principles. Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be first referred to Arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any enactment of statutory modification thereof. The arbitration proceedings shall be in the English Language and shall be held in Bangalore, Subject to the proceeding paragraph, the Courts in Bangalore shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any dispute, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 difference or claims arising out if this Agreement to Lease. 10. The dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent regarding the outstanding dues. The petitioner requested the respondent to pay the outstanding dues. The respondent did not pay the amount. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.4/2017 seeking for possession and payment of arrears of rent. In the said suit, the respondent filed an application under Section 8 of the Act of 1996, which was dismissed. The respondent, aggrieved by the order on application filed under Section 8 of the Act of 1996, preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.20052/2019 before this Court. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court allowed the writ petition in part on 20.04.2022 and directed the trial Court to reconsider the application. Meanwhile, the petitioner filed I.A.No.3 to withdraw the suit with a liberty to invoke the arbitration clause as contained in leave cum license agreement. The said application was allowed on 08.11.2023. The petitioner - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 was permitted to withdraw the suit with a liberty to invoke arbitration clause as contained in leave cum license agreement dated 14.03.2014. After the disposal of the said suit, the petitioner issued a notice under Section 21 of the Act of 1996 on 22.01.2024, proposing the name of the arbitrator. The said notice was served to the respondent. Despite the service of notice, the respondent did not reply to the arbitration notice. 11. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause in the lease cum license agreement and the dispute arose between the petitioner and respondent out of the terms and conditions of the lease cum license agreement. The dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator. Accordingly, I answer point in the affirmative. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5004 CMP No. 119 of 2024 12. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. ii. Shri Justice Ram Mohan Reddy, learned Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondent as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules. iii. The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru. iv. Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy to the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB