Allowed

M/S Trinco Property v. Mr. N.R. Sumanth Kumar

Karnataka HC19 Feb 2021CMP/160/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order admits a civil miscellaneous petition filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for the appointment of an arbitrator. The High Court, finding proof of an agreement with an arbitration clause and a disputed issue, allowed the petition and appointed a sole arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Shri. N. Narayan, Retired District Judge, as the Sole Arbitrator in the present case.

M/S Trinco Property Vs Mr. N.R. Sumanth Kumar — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶6

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.160/2020

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/s Trinco Property No.305A, Anand Onyx 2^nd Floor, 15^th Cross 100 feet Road, J.P.Nagar 5^th Phase, Bengaluru-560 078 Represented by its Managing Partner Mr. M.S.Divya

¶9

... Petitioner (By Sri Amshith Hegde H S, Advocate)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Mr. N.R.Sumanth Kumar Aged about 39 years S/o Sri N.R.Chandra R/at No.816L, 16^th Cross 7^th Block, Jayanagar (West) Bengaluru – 560 082

¶12

Mrs. N.R.Meghana Aged about 36 years D/o Sri N.R.Chandra Currently R/at 73 Woodville Drive Pembroke Park Portsmouth, England-PO12TQ Represented by her GPA holder Sri N.R.Sumanth Kumar

¶13

…Respondents (Respondents 1 and 2 – Served, unrepresented)

¶14

¶15

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to issue an order of appointment of any arbitrator from the panel maintained in the High Court of Karnataka to adjudicate the dispute between the petitioner and respondents arising out of MOU dated 09.02.2018 (Annexure-A) between the petitioner and respondents.

¶16

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking for appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the petitioner and respondents arising out of memorandum of understanding dated 09.02.2018 at Annexure-A.

¶19

The petitioner submits that the petitioner and respondents had entered into a memorandum of understanding on 09.02.2018 as per copy of the memorandum of understanding produced at Annexure-A, it is submitted that disputes have arisen in execution of the business arrangements as reflected in the memorandum of understanding, as the respondents have not handed over two sites to

¶20

¶21

the petitioner. It is further submitted that the legal

¶22

notice came to be issued to the respondents at Annexure-B detailing the dispute and the same was received by the respondents and replied as per the reply notice at Annexure-E. In the absence of concurrence as regards appointment of an arbitrator by taking note of the dispute raised by the respondents, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

¶23

It is notice that though the respondents have been served and notice held sufficient, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents.

¶24

Taking note of the agreement at Annexure-A between the petitioner and the respondents, clause for arbitration as found in the said agreement, legal notice detailing the dispute at Annexure-B and reply notice of the respondents at Annexure-E, case is madeout for allowing of the petition.

¶25

¶26

It becomes clear from the material on

¶27

record that there exist an agreement and if there is a dispute, that clause for resolution by reference to arbitration. Accordingly petition is allowed by appointing Shri. N. Narayan, Retired District Judge, to enter into the said reference of Arbitration and act as the Sole Arbitrator in the present case in the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International), Bengaluru, as per the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre.

¶28

(i) All claims and contentions of any of the parties are left/kept open to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶29

(ii) A copy of this order be sent forthwith to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru, for proceeding further in the matter.

¶30

¶31

(iii) Registry is directed to return all original documents produced by any of the parties after obtaining Photostat copies of the same.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

Kmv*

M/S Trinco Property v. Mr. N.R. Sumanth Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Trinco Property v. Mr. N.R. Sumanth Kumar

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

B P Manjunath Vs Official Liquidator

Mr. Vivek Mathias Vs United Breweries (Holdings) Limited

Ms Kiran Mazumdar Shaw Vs the Official Liquidator

Rahim Khan Vs H Mushtari Jan

Ruptub Solutions Private Limited Vs Radhe Shyam Gautam HUF

H. M. Trust Vs Designated Committee Sabka Vishwas