- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 471 OF 2024 BETWEEN: M/S SORTING HAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MARUTHI INFOTECH CENTRE, 5TH FLOOR, A-WING, DOMLUR, KORAMANGALA, INNER RING ROAD, DOMLUR, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA 560 071, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR. HARISH SASIKUMAR E HARISH.SASIKUMAR@UNACADEMY.COM …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KASHYAP N NAIK., ADV.) AND: MR GAJENDER AGGARWAL AGED 42, SON OF SHRI. MAHESH KUMAR, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 800, MAHAVEER NAGAR 1, BEHIND NEW JAIN MANDIR, KOTA CITY, KOTA RAJASTHAN-324 006 Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 ALSO AT 801, SKY PARK, NEAR TRACK UNION, KESHAVPURA, KOTA (RAJASTHAN) - 324 005 E GAJENDERAGG09@GMAIL.COM …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) THE CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO A. APPOINT HON’BLE SHRI. A.P.MURARI, DISTRICT JUDGE (RETIRED) OR ANY OTHER PERSON THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT, AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PARTIES OUT OF THE PLUS EDUCATOR AGREEMENT DATED 02.06.2022 (ANNEXURE-A) AS PER CLAUSE 18 OF THE PLUS EDUCATOR AGREEMENT DATED 02.06.2022 HEREIN, AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioner filed this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’), to appoint a Sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent arising out of Educator Agreement dated 06.06.2022 as per clause 18 vide Annexure-A. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: The petitioner entered into an Educator Agreement and effective from 10.06.2022 to engage the services of the respondent as an Educator on the petitioner's online platform on 06.06.2022. The respondent breached the agreement and the code of conduct mentioned thereunder by engaging in the use of extremely derogatory language to reprimand a student, and his parents in one of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 classes on 02.12.2023. The petitioner issued a notice for termination on 08.12.2023. The petitioner issued an email requiring the respondent to refund the unutilized advance on 18.01.2024. The respondent issued a legal notice to the petitioner through his counsel calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount raised towards the invoices, and cost of the notice on 24.01.2024. The petitioner replied to the notice on 22.02.2024 denying the averments made in the legal notice. There is an arbitration clause in the agreement and the petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice dated 25.07.2024 under Section 21 of the Act of 1996 proposing the name of Shri A.P.Murari, District Judge (Retired) to act as an arbitrator. The respondent issued a reply on 30.07.2024 to Section 21 notice refusing the nomination of the arbitrator made by the petitioner, and making various claims against the petitioner. As the parties were unable to arrive at a consensus regarding the appointment of the arbitrator, the petition is filed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 3. A notice was issued to the respondent. Despite the service of a notice, the respondent remained unrepresented. 4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and respondent entered into an Educator Agreement on 06.06.2022, and the respondent committed a breach of the terms and conditions of the agreement. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice and proposing the name of the arbitrator, however the respondent refused and did not agree to the name proposed by the petitioner. He submits that there is an arbitration clause, and the arbitral dispute arose between the parties to the petition, and the same is to be resolved through an arbitration. Hence, on these grounds, prays to allow the petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 6. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. The point, that would arise for consideration is as follows: “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator in terms of clause No.18 of Educator Agreement dated 06.06.2022 as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” 8. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and respondent have entered into an agreement dated 06.06.2022. The respondent has committed a breach of terms and conditions of the agreement. 9. The petitioner has produced the Educator Agreement, which discloses that there is an arbitration clause i.e., clause No.18, which reads as follows: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 18. GOVERNING LAW AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of India. In the event of any dispute arising out of, under, or in relation to, this Agreement, the Parties agree to submit such dispute to arbitration by a sole arbitrator appointed jointly by both parties. Such arbitration shall be in accordance with the rules framed under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (which rules are deemed to be incorporated in this Agreement by reference herein) and shall be held in Bangalore. All proceedings of such arbitration shall be in the English language. The arbitral awards rendered shall be final and binding and shall not be subject to any form of appeal. The successful party may seek to enforce the award in an appropriate jurisdiction, including India. Courts in Bangalore shall have exclusive jurisdiction to determine any disputes arising out of, under, or in relation to, this Agreement. 10. From the perusal of the arbitration clause, it is clear that if any dispute arise between the parties to the petition, the dispute has to be resolved through an arbitrator by a sole arbitrator appointed jointly by both the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 parties. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice dated 25.07.2024 proposing the name of the arbitrator. The respondent replied to the arbitration notice vide Annexure-F, and the respondent refused to accept the name of the arbitrator proposed by the petitioner. There is an arbitration clause in the agreement, and the arbitral dispute arose between the parties to the petition and the dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator. Accordingly, I answer point in the affirmative. 11. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. ii. Shri Justice Anand Byra Reddy, learned Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8870 CMP No. 471 of 2024 respondent in terms of clause 18 of the educator agreement as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules. iii. The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Director of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru, and the learned Arbitrator. iv. The Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy to the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same. v. In view of the disposal of the petition, pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB