- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 418 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S STAMBHA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.110/2, 1ST FLOOR, KRISHNAPPA LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560048 REPRESENTED BY ITS SUTHORIZED SIGNATORY & DIRECTOR MANISH SETHIA …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VEERESH MAHESH UPPIN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE SHRI VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 2. SMT. MUNIRATHNA W/O SRI NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 3. SMT. V N CHAITHRA D/O SRI NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 4. SRI. V.N. SHASHIKUMAR S/O SRI. NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS 5. SMT. V N PAVITRA D/O SRI NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 6. SRI MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE SRI NAJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 7. SMT. MAHADEVAMMA W/O SRI MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 8. SRI MANJULA V M D/O SRI MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 9. SRI SHANTH KUMAR V M S/O SRI MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 10. SRI DILIP KUAMR V M S/O SRI MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS 11. SRI CHOWDAPPA S/O LATE SRI ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 12. SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O SRI CHOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 13. SRI SRINIVAS V C @ MANJUNATH S/O SRI CHOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 VAGATA VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT HOSKOTE – 562114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RACHANA P PISE, ADVOCATE FOR R11, R12 & R13 R1 TO R10 ARE SERVED) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(5) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT., PRAYING TO REFER THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS TO ARBITRATION BY WAY OF APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR AS PER CLAUSE 10 OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT i.e. AGREEMENT OF SALE DATED 22.06.2021 (ANNEXURE 1). 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 for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondents in terms of clause 10 of the agreement of sale dated 22.06.2021 vide Annexure-1. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: 3. The respondents are the absolute owners of the vacant land in Survey No.111/3, measuring 3 acres (excluding 02.08 gunta of kharab land) situated at Vagata village, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural. The petitioner intended to purchase the said land and agreed to purchase the said land from the respondents. The respondents agreed to sell the property to the petitioner for consideration of ₹2,41,31,250/- and the petitioner paid a sum of ₹25,00,000/- towards the earnest money. Accordingly, the respondents have executed an agreement of sale dated 22.06.2021 vide Annexure-1. The respondents committed a breach of terms and conditions of the contract. Hence, the petitioner invoked an arbitration clause 10 of the sale agreement dated 22.06.2021, by issuing an arbitration notice dated 06.11.2024. The respondents did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence, this petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 4. Notice was issued to respondent Nos.1 to 10. Despite the service of notice, the respondents No.1 to 10 remained unrepresented. 5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents No.11 to 13. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the arbitral dispute arose between the parties in furtherance of sale agreement and the petitioner has invoked arbitration clause by issuing notice. Hence, prays to allow the petition. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents No.11 to 13 submits no objection to allow the petition. 8. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 9. The point that would arise for consideration is as follows: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitration in terms of clause 10 of sale agreement dated 22.06.2021 as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the Rules? 10. It is an undisputed fact that the respondents are the absolute owners of the property in question, and agreed to sell the said land for a consideration of ₹2,41,31,250/- and the petitioner paid ₹25,00,000/- towards the advance sale consideration amount and the sale agreement vide Annexure 1 was executed. It is contended that the petitioner was ready and willing to perform his part of contract, but the respondents were not ready and willing to perform their part of contract. Thus, the respondents have committed a breach of terms and conditions of the agreement of sale. There is an arbitration clause i.e., clause 10 in the agreement of sale, which reads as follows: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 10. Arbitration: 10.1 All disputes, differences, claims, etc., arising out of and/or connected with this agreement shall be resolved through arbitration to be conducted under the provisions of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 10.2 The Arbitral Tribunal shall comprise of a sole arbitrator to be nominated by the purchaser. 10.3 The arbitration proceedings shall be held only at Bangalore and shall be conducted only in the English language. 11. From the perusal of clause 10, it is clear that, if any dispute, differences, claims, etc., arising out of and/or connected with the agreement shall be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice on 06.11.2024 under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The respondents did not reply to the arbitration notice. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 12. The learned counsel for respondents No.11 to 13 submits no objection to the allow the petition. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER i. The Civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. ii. Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Venugopala Gowda, former Judge, High Court of Karnataka is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondents as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the Rules. iii. All contentions of the parties are kept open. iv. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the learned arbitrator and the director of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7050 CMP No. 418 of 2025 v. The Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy of the documents produced by the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same. vi. Pending IA(s), if any, disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS CT:KHV