- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 341 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ARUN N. G. S/O NAGARAJA B.G. AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT NO 1773/1, 6TH MAIN 2NDSTAGE, D BLOCK RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU 560010 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NEGLUR ARAVIND.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. NAVEEN KUMAR. N AGED ABOUT MAJOR S/OS RI NAGARAJA C R/AT NO 21, SATYNARAYANA ROAD KAVERI NAGAR MAGADI MAIN ROAD BENGALURU 560079 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MALATESH H.,ADVOCATE) THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996., PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT ARBITRATION CLAUSES 20 AND 21 OF ANNEXURE - A DATED 21.07.2016 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, 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 Clauses 20 and 21 of the Reconstitution of Partnership Deed 22.07.2016 vide Annexure “A”. 2. Brief facts leading rise to filing of this petition are as follows. 3. The petitioner, respondent, and one Sri.Mallikarjuna S. were the partners in the firm M/s.High Tech Laser Machining. The said partnership firm was constituted by a deed of partnership dated 21.08.2014. Sri.Mallikarjuna S. has retired from the firm on 21.07.2016. The partnership firm was reconstituted by another deed titled Reconstitution of Partnership - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 Deed, where only the petitioner and the respondent remained as partners in the said firm. There is an arbitration clause in the Re-constitution of Partnership Deed for resolution of the disputes. 4. A dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent, as the respondent is not showing any interest in the development of business of the firm. The respondent has declined even to continue the existing business, and because of default and negligence of the respondent in participating in the business of the firm, the business of the firm is suffering. The firm has reached a stage where it has become impossible even to earn sufficient to pay the rent, worker's salary and other statutory and contractual dues. 5. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice dated 19.05.2025. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 However, the postal cover returned with an endorsement. Hence, this petition. 6. Respondent filed a statement of objections admitting regarding constituting a partnership deed dated 21.08.2014 and later on, Sri.Mallikarjuna S. has retired from the said firm and the said partnership firm was reconstituted on 21.07.2016. It is contended that the respondent had applied for a loan in the name of M/s.High-tech Laser Machining by mortgaging his property and is solely paying the loan installment, including the share of installment on behalf of Arun.N.G. It is contended that there is no any type of dispute between the parties to the petition. Hence, prays to dismiss the petition. 7. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, respondent and one Mallikarjuna have constituted a partnership firm and thereafter, Mallikarjuna has retired from the partnership firm. The petitioner and the respondent have reconstituted the partnership firm by executing a Reconstitution of Partnership deed. He submitted that a dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent, and the said dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner issued an arbitration notice by invoking the arbitration clause contained in the Reconstitution of Partnership deed. The said notice was returned unserved. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the petition. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no dispute between the petitioner and the respondent. Hence the question of referring the alleged dispute to the arbitration does - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 not arise. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition. 10. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 11. The point that would arise for consideration is as follows. “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent to the arbitration in terms of Clauses 20 and 21 of the Reconstitution of Partnership deed dated 21.07.2016, as per the Provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ? ” 12. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner, respondent and one Mallikarjuna S. have constituted a partnership firm and thereafter, Mallikarjuna retired from the said partnership firm. After the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 retirement of Mallikarjuna, the petitioner and the respondent reconstituted the partnership firm and executed a Reconstitution of Partnership deed vide Annexure ‘A’. A dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner has produced the Reconstitution of a Partnership deed executed between the petitioner and the respondent, and there is an arbitration Clause in the Reconstitution of Partnership deed. 13. Clauses 20 and 21 of the same reads as follows: “20. DISPUTES / DIFFERENCES: a. In the event of any dispute arising among the partners either with regard to the carrying on of the business or generally out of this deed of partnership, such disputes shall be settled by arbitration to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940, or any amendments thereof. b. The Partners shall have the right and liberty to add, alter, modify or delete any of the terms and conditions and - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 amendments shall govern the relationship between the partners of the firm. 21. ARBITRATION: That, in respect of any dispute arising between the parties to the agreement and/or their legal heirs / representatives, as regard to interpretation and enforcement of the terms of this deed, the decision of the arbitrator, to be appointed mutually by the parties hereto, shall be final and binding.” 14. From the perusal of the Arbitration clause, it is clear that, if any dispute arises between the petitioner and the respondent, the said dispute should be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner invoking the arbitration clause, had issued an arbitration notice dated 19.05.2025 to the respondent proposing the name of an arbitrator. The respondent did not concur with the name proposed by the petitioner. 15. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause and a dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent and the same has to be resolved through - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 an arbitration. Thus, the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitration. In view of the above discussion, I answer point under consideration in the affirmative. 16. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (I) The Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed. (II) Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Vishwantha Shetty, Former judge of the High Court of Karnataka, is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondent in terms of Clauses 20 and 21 of the Reconstitution of a Partnership deed, vide Annexure ‘A’ as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules. (III) The Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the learned - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4126 CMP No. 341 of 2025 Arbitrator and to the Director of 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(online) List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44