Allowed

M/s. Sree Venkateswara Projects v. M.S.Lakshmana Rao

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Feb 2022ARBAPPL/13/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this arbitration application, the Court noted mutual allegations of breach between applicant and respondents regarding a development agreement. Ruling that a dispute exists and acknowledging the parties' agreement, the Court appointed a retired judge as the sole arbitrator to resolve the matter.

What did the court decide?

Justice Dr. B. Siva Sankara Rao (retired) appointed as sole Arbitrator with liberty to raise claims.

M/s. Sree Venkateswara Projects Vs M.S.Lakshmana Rao — Arbitration | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI

¶2

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶3

ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.13 of 2021

¶4

(Through physical mode)

¶5

M/s. Sree Venkateswara Projects, Represented by its Managing Partner Narla Phani Kumar S/o. Srihari Rao, Dr.No.33-26-14C, Chalamalavari street, Khasturibhaipeta, Vijayawada, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. ..Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M.S. Lakshmana Rao S/o. late M.V.V.S. Murthi, Aged about 57 years, Occ: Business, r/o. Plot No.283, Road No.10C, MLA and MPs colony, Suryakaant, Jubilee Hills, Road No.10, Shaikpet, Hyderabad-500 033 and others. …Respondents

¶8

Counsel for the applicant : Mr. S. Sridhar

¶9

Counsel for the respondent No.1 : Mr. G. Seena Kumar

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

Dt:18.02.2022

¶12

The present application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been preferred for appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the applicant firm and respondent Nos.1 to 3 arising out of development agreement-cum-irrevocable general power of attorney dated 25.01.2018.

¶13

The subject agreement between the parties was entered into by the owners permitting and granting license to the developer to raise a multi-storied building over the land belonging to them on the terms and conditions as contained in the agreement. The agreement also contains an arbitration clause which is worded in the following manner at para 30:

¶14

HCJ A.A.No.13/2021

¶15

¶16

“30. (a) if any dispute or difference of any claim whatsoever shall arise between the Owner and the Developer in connection with or arising out of this Development Agreement (and whether before or after the termination or breach of this agreement) parties shall promptly and in good faith negotiate with a view to its amicable resolution and settlement.

¶17

(b) In the event of no amicable resolution or settlement is reached within a period of 15 days from the date on which the dispute or difference arose, such dispute or difference shall be referred to a sole Arbitrator appointed by the Owner who shall act under the provisions of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1986.

¶18

¶19

According to the applicant, the owners have violated the terms of the agreement, thereby frustrated the contract, whereas, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 would submit that it is the applicant, who has violated the terms of the contract, and not the respondent No.1. It seems, both the parties are alleging violation of terms of the contract against each other. While the applicant is seeking damages for breach of contract, the same prayer is made by the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 against the applicant.

¶20

Since both the parties are alleging breach of contract against each other, there is definitely existence of dispute between the parties, which needs to be referred for adjudication by an Arbitrator in terms of contract.

¶21

HCJ A.A.No.13/2021

¶22

¶23

Learned counsel for the parties have agreed to refer the dispute to be adjudicated by the Arbitrator.

¶24

In view of the above, Justice Dr.B.Siva Sankara Rao (retired Judge) is appointed as sole Arbitrator. Both the parties shall appear before the Arbitrator on 04.04.2022. Both the parties are at liberty to raise their respective claims before the Arbitrator.

¶25

The fee of the Arbitrator, place of arbitration and the other terms and conditions shall be settled by the Arbitrator so appointed in consultation with the parties.

¶26

Registry will send a copy of this order to Justice Dr.B.Siva Sankara Rao (retired Judge) to his proper address.

¶27

Accordingly, the Arbitration Application is disposed of. No costs. All pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.

¶28

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ

HCJ A.A.No.13/2021

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶33

A.A. No.13 of 2021

¶34

Dt:18.02.2022

¶35

M/s. Sree Venkateswara Projects v. M.S.Lakshmana Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Sree Venkateswara Projects v. M.S.Lakshmana Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Venkata Rao Infra Projects Private Limited Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

N.S.R.Murthy Vs the Govt. of A.P.

P.Satishbabu, Vs Sri Venkateshwara University

M/s.Alana Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Vs M/s.My Preferred Transformation and Hospitality Pvt., Ltd.

Dr. Nanduri Janaki Ram Vs M/S Oak Tree Constructions Private Limited

Dr.Nanduri Janakli Ram, Vs M/S Sri Laxmli Venkateswara Real Estates