Allowed

M/S Vijaya Energy Plus Private Ltd. v. M/S Mangalore Internet City Pvt. Ltd.

Karnataka HC5 Apr 2021CMP/340/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav appointed Sri. Moosa Kunhi Nayarmoole as a sole arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and respondent pursuant to their arbitration agreement.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sri. Moosa Kunhi Nayarmoole as sole arbitrator and disposal of the petition.

M/S Vijaya Energy Plus Private Ltd. Vs M/S Mangalore Internet… — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF APRIL 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

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

¶5

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.340/2018

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M/s.Vijaya Energy Plus Private Ltd., A company registered under companies Act, 1956 having its office at, No.155,SKC Nilayam, 19^th Main Road, 6^th Block, Koramangala, Bangalore-560095. Represented by its Managing Director, Sri.Vishwanathan.K.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

(By Sri.M.N.Umesh, Advocate)

¶10

AND:

¶11

M/s. Mangalore Internet City Pvt. Ltd., C-1, Maximus Commercial Complex, Light House Hill Road, Mangalore-575001. Represented by its Director.

¶12

…Respondent (By Sri.R I D’Sa, Advocate)

¶13

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to appoint an sole arbitrator as per clause No.15 of the work order/arbitration agreement executed on 04.10.2013 vide Annexure-A, as deem fit and pass any such order/s as necessary under the facts and circumstances of this case, in order to meet the ends of justice.

¶14

¶15

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

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The petitioner has sought for appointment of an arbitrator in order to resolve the dispute arising out of the Work Order dated 04.10.2013.

¶18

The petitioner submits that Clause-15 provides for resolution of disputes by resort to arbitration with the venue for arbitration at Mangalore.

¶19

It is submitted that notice was issued by the petitioner invoking the arbitration clause and as per the notice dated 04.02.2017.

¶20

It is further submitted that the said notice

¶21

has been served on the respondent and in the absence of any concurrence, present petition has been filed.

¶22

¶23

Upon notice learned counsel for the respondent though has filed their statement of objections raising various contentions, at the hearing of the petition, it is submitted that arbitrator may be appointed keeping open the contentions of the respondent.

¶24

Taking note of the Work Order at Annexure-A, Clause-15 which provides for resolution of disputes by way of an arbitrator at Mangalore noticing the dispute as made out in the notice and also stand of the learned counsel for the respondent, the petition is allowed.

¶25

Sri. Sri. Moosa Kunhi Nayarmoole, Retired

¶26

District Judge, is appointed as an arbitrator on the same terms as are applicable if the same were to be conducted before the arbitration Centre including stipulation as regards to the fees of the arbitrator.

¶27

¶28

8. Both counsels submit that arbitrator would

¶29

take assistance of technical expert. Taking note of the nature of dispute and the said submission is taken note of and it is left to the arbitrator to take decision regarding the same.

¶30

Accordingly, this petition under Section 11 of the Act, 1996 is disposed off. Sri. Moosa Kunhi Nayarmoole, Retired District Judge, is directed to act as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as per the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International) at Mangalore.

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

Registry is directed to return all original

¶34

documents produced by any of the parties after obtaining Photostat copies of the same.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

M/S Vijaya Energy Plus Private Ltd. v. M/S Mangalore Internet City Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Vijaya Energy Plus Private Ltd. v. M/S Mangalore Internet City Pvt. Ltd.

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

Official Liquidator of Vs Exim Bank

Shri D S Vishwanath Vs Official Liquidator

Smt. Shanti Marapatla Vs M/S. Trinity Investment Castings (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Mphasis Limited Vs Iti Limited

Anusha G R Vs M H Shashidhar

M/S Smile Electronics Ltd., Vs State of Karnataka