- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 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. 309 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S ROYALOAK INFRASTRUCTURE LLP HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.5, 4TH FLOOR, RAJ SQUARE, VIJAYA BANK COLONY, BANASWADI OUTER RING BANGALORE - 560043 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. S MATHAN …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHARADWAJ K R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR SUNIL KUMAR SU-KRIPA NEAR MALARAYA DAIVASTHANA URWA CHILIMBI MANGALORE – 575008 2. MR. VADIRAJA A EESHAVYASAM MANDARABAIL, DEREBAIL KONCHADY MANGALORE – 575008 3. MR. MADHUKAR BEHIND ANSARI WOOD INDUSTRY KOLYA Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 of 2025 KOTEKAR POST MANGALORE - 575022 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAKESH KINI., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AS PER CLAUSE 32 OF LEASE DEED DATED 20.09.2021, AS ANNEXURE A, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of Clause (32) of the Lease Deed dated 20.09.2021 vide Annexure “A”. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 of 2025 3. The respondents executed a lease deed in favour of the petitioner on 20.09.2021. The monthly rent was fixed at ₹3,50,000/- and the petitioner paid a sum of ₹17,50,000/- as a refundable security deposit. The respondents were obligated to hand-over the possession of the suit schedule property by completing structural repairs/interior and improvement work as mentioned in Annexure “A” of the registered lease deed dated 20.09.2021, however, they failed to complete the said work within 90 days. The respondents have committed a breach of terms of the lease deed. There is an arbitration agreement. The petitioner issued a notice called upon the respondents to refund Rs.23,62,500/- with interest. The respondents replied to the demand notice. 4. Thereafter, the petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act on 07.03.2025. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 of 2025 respondents have given an untenable reply. Hence this petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the arbitral dispute arose between the parties pursuant to the lease deed. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice. Hence, prays to allow the petition. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have no objection to the appoint an arbitrator. 8. 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 (32) of the Lease Deed dated 20.09.2021 vide Annexure “A”, as per the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 of 2025 provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” 9. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and the respondents have entered into a lease deed on 20.09.2021. The respondents committed a breach of terms and conditions of the lease deed. 10. The dispute arose between the parties to the petition and the said dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration in terms of Clause (32) of the lease deed. The petitioner issued a demand notice and though the respondents replied to the demand notice, however, the respondents did not comply with the terms and conditions of the legal notice. The petitioner, by invoking the arbitration Clause (32) of the lease deed, issued an arbitration notice on 07.03.2025 proposing the name of an arbitrator. The respondents did not concur in appointing the arbitrator. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 of 2025 11. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause in the lease deed dated 20.09.2021, which reads as follows: “ 32. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Any controversy or claim or dispute or difference arising out of or relating to the Lease Deed or interpretation of any provisions hereof or any breach or alleged breach hereof, shall be referred to and finally settled in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by a sole arbitrator to be jointly appointed by both the Parties. The arbitration proceedings shall be held in Mangaluru and the decisions of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the Parties. The language of the arbitration shall be in English language. b) The Courts in Mangaluru shall alone have jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Lease deed.” 12. As there is an arbitration clause in the lease deed and a dispute arose between the petitioner and the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 of 2025 respondents, the said dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. 13. Further, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have no objection to nominate an arbitrator. 14. In view of the above discussion, the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute between the parties to the petition to an arbitrator. Accordingly, the point for consideration is answered in the affirmative. 15. In the result, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (I) This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. (II) Sri. D. Visweshwara Bhat, learned retired District Judge is nominated as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute(s) between the petitioner and the respondents in terms of Clause (32) of Page No. 7 is retyped and replaced vide Chamber Order dated 24.02.2026 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5083 CMP No. 309 of 2025 the Lease Deed dated 20.09.2021, 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 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.: 28