- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 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. 235 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S NAMMA MANE HOUSING LLP HAVING ITS OFFICE AT MC JUNCTION, 201, 3RD MAIN ROAD, KASTURINAGAR, BANGALORE 560 043. REPRESENTED BY ITS DESIGNATED PARTNER SRI. P. A. ANANTHANARAYANAN ADDRESS FOR COMMUNICATION A2-221, SOBHA ONYX, AGARA, SARJAPUR ROAD, BENGALURU 560 102 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K R KRISHNAMURTHY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR VENKATARAJU K B S/O MR. BYREGOWADA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 2. MRS. INDRAMMA W/O MR. VENKATARAJU. K. B AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 3. MR. RAJENDRA K.V S/O MR. VENKATARAJU. K. B AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 4. MRS. APOORVA K. V D/O MR. VENKATARAJU. K. B AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 5. MR. HEMANTH GOWDA K.V S/O MR. VENKATARAJU. K. B AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS RESPONDENT Nos. 1 TO 5 ARE R/AT NO. 92, NEAR MILK DAIRY, KOLATHUR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU - 562 114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ESHWARA H H., ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5 SRI. RAKSHITH GOWDA K.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.11(5) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT., 1996., PRAYING TO (i) APPOINT SHRI. KUKKAJE RAMKRISHNA BHAT, FORMER REGISTRAR, (JUDICIAL) OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (RTD.), JUDICIAL LAYOUT, SANJAY NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 094 AS THE ARBITRATOR, TO ENTER UPON REFERENCE AND ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES, AS PER THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN ANNEXURE-E DATED 25.01.2017 AT CLAUSE NO.8.2 OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE (ii) APPOINT ANY OTHER FORMER JUDGE OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AS THE ARBITRATOR, TO ENTER UPON REFERENCE AND ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondents in terms of Clause 8.2 of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.01.2017 at Annexure ‘E’. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: 3. The petitioner acquired rights for development of the land comprised in Sy.Nol.179/3 of Dandupalya village. The petitioner to support the development activities leased the property belonging to the respondents. The petitioner, respondent No.1 and his sister Ms.K.B.Nagaveni entered into another lease agreement on 15.04.2014 which subsumed and superseded the earlier agreements. Respondent No.1, apart from receiving rent, has also taken - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 money from the petitioner on several occasion to the extent of ₹2,15,000/-. 4. The petitioner and respondent No.1 entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.01.2017 as at Annexure ‘E’ recording the intention of the parties. The petitioner also made further payment to the respondent No.1 on 25.01.2017 and also executed an addendum on 10.05.2017. Respondent No.1 and his family members executed a registered sale agreement. 5. The petitioner issued a legal notice on 26.06.2024 demanding respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5 to come forward to execute the Joint Development Agreement by receiving the balance non-refundable security deposit. The petitioner came to know about respondent No.1 and his family members trying to sell the suit schedule property and on verification, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 came to know of execution of the agreement of sale dated 18.03.2024. 6. The petitioner issued an arbitration notice on 03.03.2025 proposing the name of Sri.Kukkaje Ramakrishna Bhat, Former Retired District Judge as an arbitrator. The respondents replied on 12.03.2025 suggesting the name of Sri R.Ravi, retired District Judge as an arbitrator. 7. The petitioner filed a Commercial Arbitration Application No.313 of 2024 which came to be partly allowed vide order dated 19.03.2025. Hence, this petition. 8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an arbitration clause and the arbitration notice is issued by the petitioner. Therefore, the dispute has - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 to be resolved by the arbitrator. Accordingly, prays to allow the petition. 10. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondents have no objection to appoint an arbitrator. 11. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 12. The point that would arise for consideration in this petition is as follows: “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator in terms of Clause 8.2 of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.01.2017, as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” 13. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and respondents have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding and the respondents have received an - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 amount from the petitioner. A dispute arose between the parties and the same has to be resolved through arbitration, as there is an arbitration clause i.e., clause 8.2 in the Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.01.2017. 14. Clause 8.2 of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.01.2017 reads as follows: “TERMINATION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION: 8.1 The Owner shall not be entitled to terminate this MOU. 8.2 The Parties agree that any and all disputes, differences, claims whatsoever, which shall at any time hereafter (whether during the subsistence of this MOU or upon or after its discharge or determination) arise between the parties hereto, concerning any of the provisions contained herein, shall be first attempted to be settled amicably, within ten (10) days after such dispute arises, failing which the dispute shall be referred to arbitration to be conducted by a sole - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 Arbitrator appointed by the parties. The venue of the Arbitration shall be Bangalore and the language of the arbitration proceedings shall be English. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 8.3 Only the Courts in Bangalore shall have sole and exclusive Jurisdiction over all matters connected with and/or arising out of this MOU.” 15. Further, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondents have no objection to appoint Sri.R.Ravi, learned retired District Judge, as an arbitrator. 16. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents that the respondents have no objections to nominate an arbitrator and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the point is answered in the affirmative, and, I proceed to pass the following order: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 ORDER (I) This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. (II) Sri.R.Ravi, learned retired District Judge, is nominated as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute(s) between the petitioner and the respondents in terms of Clause (8.2) of the Memorandum of Understanding, as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules. (III) The Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator, and the Director of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bangalore. (IV) All the contentions of the parties are kept open. (V) The Registry is directed to return the original and/or certified copies, if produced, to the respective - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5005 CMP No. 235 of 2025 parties who have produced it/them by following due procedure. (VI) Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25