Allowed

Mr. Bk Srinivas Murthy v. M/S Unishire Skycapes LLP

Karnataka HC16 Sept 2022CMP/168/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil miscellaneous petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the High Court of Karnataka held that a claim made by one party and denied by the other constitutes a dispute. The Court appointed a former judge as the sole arbitrator by consent of the parties.

What did the court decide?

The petition was allowed, and Sri. A.V. Chandrashekar was appointed as the sole arbitrator with the consent of both counsels.

Mr. Bk Srinivas Murthy Vs M/S Unishire Skycapes LLP — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

CMP No. 168 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 168 OF 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. BK SRINIVAS MURTHY S/O LATE P. KRISHNA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 58 NO.51, TD LANE, COTTONPET BANGALORE-560053

¶9

MRS. BK LALITHA W/O DR. NARAYANA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 55 NO.159, GEETHANJALI LAYOUT HAL 3^RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560075

¶10

MR. BK PRAKASH S/O LATE P. KRISHNA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 50 NO.51, TD LANE, COTTONPET BANGALORE-560053

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by POORNIMA SHIVANNA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

M/S UNISHIRE SKYSCAPES LLP ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT NO.42, CASTLE STREET ASHOK NAGAR BANGALORE-560025 REP. BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY

¶16

MR. KIRTI KANTILAL MEHTA PARTNER M/S UNISHIRE SKYSCAPES LLP NO.42, CASTLE STREET ASHOK NAGAR, BANGALORE-560025 (R2-DELETED VIDE ORDER DATED 12.08.2022)

¶17

¶18

CMP No. 168 of 2022

¶19

MR. PRATIK MEHTA PARTNER M/S UNISHIRE SKYSCAPES LLP NO.42, CASTLE STREET ASHOK NAGAR, BANGALORE-560025

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. G.S. VENKAT SUBBA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶22

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) AND (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO NOMINATE HON'BLE JUSTICE ASHOK B HINCHIGERI, RETIRED JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR OR ANY RETIRED HIGH COURT JUDGE AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 20 OF THE JDA DATED 19.11.2012 AT ANNEXURE-A.

¶23

THIS CMP, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs

¶26

a. Nominate Hon'ble Justice Ashok B Hinchigeri, Retired Judge of the High Court of Karnataka as the sole arbitrator or any Retired High Court Judge as the sole arbitrator in terms of Clause 20 of the JDA dated 19.11.2012 at Annexure-A.

¶27

b. Pass such other and further orders and the grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.

¶28

The petitioner and respondents had entered into a Joint Development Agreement dated 19.11.2012 which is governed by an arbitration clause in terms

¶29

¶30

CMP No. 168 of 2022

¶31

of Clause 20 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder

¶32

for easy reference:

¶33

20. BREACH AND CONSEOUENCES:

¶34

That in the event of any dispute arising between the PARTIES or any covenants hereto is to be interpreted, the matter shall be referred to arbitration and each of the PARTY shall appoint one arbitrator and the decision of the arbitrators shall be final and binding between the PARTIES and the PARTIES hereto shall endeavor amicably settle their disputes on differences. The Arbitration proceedings shall be subject to the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the ordinances thereto and the Enactments shall be applicable.

¶35

There being a dispute which has arisen between the parties, the petitioner issued a notice calling upon the respondent to make certain payments on 22.3.2018 and when the same was not accepted, the petitioners invoked the arbitration clause and issued a notice dated 13.11.2019 appointing its arbitrator.

¶36

On receipt of the same, the respondent replied to the said notice by admitting the existence of arbitration clause but stated that there is no dispute which has arisen between the parties to be arbitrated. It is in that background the petitioner is before this Court.

¶37

¶38

CMP No. 168 of 2022

¶39

Sri. Vivek Holla., learner counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the two notices which has been issued making a claim would indicate the disputes between the parties more so when the same has not been denial by the respondents. Therefore, the respondent cannot contend that they are no disputes.

¶40

Sri. G.S. Venkat Subba Rao., learned counsel for the respondent no.1 would submit that on account of various events which have occurred, there is no amount which is liable to be paid by the respondent to the petitioners and as such there is no dispute.

¶41

Having heard both the counsels, I am of the considered opinion that when the claim is made by one party which is denied by the other party on account of subsequent event which have occurred, the very claim and denial thereof is a dispute between the parties, which would be required to be arbitrated. As such, I pass the following.

¶42

¶43

CMP No. 168 of 2022

¶44

ORDER

¶45

i. The petition is allowed.

¶46

ii. Sri.A.V.Chandrashekar, Former Judge of this Court is appointed as a sole arbitrator with the consent of the both counsels.

¶47

iii. Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Director, Bangalore Arbitration Centre for doing needful.

¶48

iv. All contentions are left open.

¶49

Sd/JUDGE

¶50

SR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 14

Mr. Bk Srinivas Murthy v. M/S Unishire Skycapes LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Bk Srinivas Murthy v. M/S Unishire Skycapes LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zoomcar India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mansh Kumar

M/S Bioplus Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sri. Venkatesh Murthy R

M/S Bioplus Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sri Venkateshappa N C

Mr.Koshy P Koshy Vs Mr.Ashvin K.T.Mathew

Sri Shivashankar Agarwal Vs Agricultural Produce Market Committee

Sri Shivashankar Agarwal Vs Agricultural Produce Market Committee