- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 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. 531 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S QUIKJET CARGO AIRLINES PVT LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 3RD FLOOR, AWFIS PRESTIGE DOTCOM BUILDING NO.16/2, RESIDENCY ROAD BANGALORE-560025 REPRESENTED BY ITS SR. MANAGER-HR VENKATACHALAM R ALSO AT: KRISHA COMPLEX 3RD FLOOR No.28, HAYES ROAD BANGALORE 560 025 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ROHAN KOTHARI., ADVOCATE) AND: MR. KAPIL SHARMA AGED MAJOR R/O C-83, RAM NAGAR SHASTRI NAGAR, JAOPUR-302016 RAJASTHAN …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T P MUTHANNA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 THIS CMP IS FILED U/S. 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT PRAYING TO APPOINT SH. ASHOK L. PUJAR (RETIRED DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE) AS SOLE ARBITRATOR IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 16 OF THE OFFER LETTER DATED 01.07.2022 AT ANNEXURE B FOR ADJUDICATING / RESOLVING THE CLAIMS, DISPUTES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AS DEEMED FIT 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. 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 parties to the petition in terms of Clause 16 of the offer letter dated 01.07.2022 as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 3. The petitioner appointed respondent as the First Officer, Flight Operations Department (Grade OM2) vide Offer Letter dated 01.07.2022. The respondent commenced his services with the petitioner from 04.07.2022 at Hyderabad on the B737-800 aircraft, as mentioned in his offer letter. Subject to training and licensing formalities in the offer letter, the petitioner's HR manual and Civil Aviation Requirements issued by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (“DGCA”), the respondent underwent a special training, including simulator, PPC, DG Training, First Aid and Security Training systems, first aid, etc., at the cost of the petitioner, in pursuance of the terms of the offer letter. 4. On 30.12.2022, the respondent abruptly tendered his resignation via email immediately after the completion of extensive training provided by the petitioner and upon the receipt of his salary for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 December 2022, stating his inability to fulfil flight duties with sufficient justification. 5. The respondent sought immediate release which was in contravention with the mandatory 6 months notice mandated under clause 3.4 of the Civil Aviation Requirements issued by DGCA dated 16.08.2017. The petitioner vide email dated 31.12.2022 appraised the respondent that in view of the petitioner's policy and DGCA CAR dated 16.08.2017, the respondent must either serve 6 months notice or pay in lieu thereof along with the training and related costs that the petitioner incurred in line with Clause 7 of the Offer Letter. 6. The petitioner was constrained to issue a second email on 17.01.2023 to the respondent reiterating his obligation to compensate the petitioner for the financial liabilities incurred by the respondent, including training costs and 6 months salary in lieu of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 notice. However, there was no response from the respondent. 7. As such, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S. No.4452 of 2023 for recovery of a sum of ₹12,80,536/- from the respondent. The said suit came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 23.04.2025 on the ground that there is an arbitral clause in the offer letter. 8. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing a notice dated 30.05.2025 under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, proposing the appointment of a sole arbitrator. The respondent failed to respond to the arbitration notice. Hence, this petition. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an arbitration clause and the arbitration notice was issued by the petitioner. Therefore, the dispute is to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 be resolved by the arbitrator. Accordingly, prays to allow the petition. 11. Learned counsel for the respondent submits no objection to allow the petition. 12. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 13. 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 16 of the offer letter dated 01.07.2022 as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” 14. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner appointed the respondent as a First Officer (Grade OM2) vide offer Letter dated 01.07.2022 and the respondent has undergone a training. After completion of training, the respondent abruptly tendered his - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 resignation via email on 30.12.2022. The petitioner replied to the email stating that the resignation submitted by the respondent was in contravention with the mandatory 6 months notice mandated under Clause 3.4 of CAR issued by the DGCA dated 16.08.2017. 15. The petitioner was constrained to issue a second email on 17.01.2023. But there was no response from the respondent. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S. No.4452 of 2023 for recovery of a sum of ₹12,80,536/- from the respondent in lieu of training costs and the un-served notice of 6 months. The said suit was dismissed on the ground that there is an arbitration clause in the offer letter. 16. The respondent filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for rejecting the plaint on the ground that there is an arbitration clause in the Offer Letter and the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 petitioner without exhausting the available remedy i.e., arbitration clause, has filed the suit. 17. The Trial Court allowed the application filed by the respondent, and the plaint by the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 23.04.2025. 18. After the rejection of plaint, the petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice dated 30.05.2025. The respondent did not reply to the arbitration notice. 19. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause in the Offer Letter dated 01.07.2022, which reads as follows: “16. Arbitration and Legal Jurisdiction: In case of any dispute arising out of this Agreement, the matter shall be referred to the CEO of the Company for arbitration. In the event you are still not satisfied, the CEO shall appoint an Arbitrator within 05 days of receipt of request to appoint an Arbitrator. Such an Arbitrator shall pass a reasoned award - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 within 07 days of his appointment. Award of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties. The venue of arbitration shall be Bangalore and the language of arbitration shall be English. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with Indian Law and both parties agree to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of its Bangalore courts.” 20. As there is an arbitration clause in the offer letter and an arbitration dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent, and the said dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. 21. Learned counsel for the respondent submits no objection to nominate an arbitrator. 22. 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. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 23. In the result, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (I) This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. (II) Sri.A.V.Vaidya, learned retired Senior Civil Judge, is nominated as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute(s) between the petitioner and the respondent in terms of Clause 16 of the Offer letter, 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 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5076 CMP No. 531 of 2025 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.: 43