Allowed

Ibibo Group Private Limited v. Economic Transport Organization Ltd.

Karnataka HC21 Nov 2022CMP/335/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court examined a civil miscellaneous petition filed for appointing an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court found the statutory ingredients established via the lease deed arbitration clause and legal notice, appointing a former judge as the sole arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's petition was allowed, Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.V. Chandrashekar appointed as Sole Arbitrator, and communication of the order directed.

Ibibo Group Private Limited Vs Economic Transport Organization… — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.335/2022

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

IBIBO GROUP PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MANAGER-LEGAL:ROHINI R 19^TH FLOOR EPITOME BUILDING, NO.5 DLF CYBER CITY DLF PHASE III GURUGRAM HARYANA -122 002.

¶8

ALSO AT IBIBO GROUP PRIVATE LIMITED 5^TH FLOOR INDIQUBE LEELA GALLERIA, HOTEL LEELA HAL 2^ND STAGE KODIHALLI BANGALORE-KARNATAKA-560008.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(By SRI. ASHA S ANAND., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND :

¶12

ECONOMIC TRANSPORT ORGANIZATION LTD., NO.18 GROUND FLOOR RABINDRA SARANI PODDAR COURT KOLKATA-700 001.

¶13

SIDDARTH ASSETS REPRESENTED BY M.N.DWARAKANATH MANAGING PARTNER

¶14

¶15

NO.9/2 MANANDI TRIDENT O V H ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU-560 004.

¶16

SIDDARTH VENTURES REPRESENTED BY M.N.DWARAKANATH MANAGING PARTNER NO.9/2 MANANDI TRIDENT O V H ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU-560 004.

¶17

... RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS SERVED -UNREPRESENTED)

¶18

THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 24 OF THE LEASE DEED DATED 01/02/2016 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A LETTER OF ATTORNMENT DATED 12.10.2016 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND LETTER OF ATTORNMENT DATED 05.11.2016 PRODUCED VICE ANNEXURE-C INTERMS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT,1996.

¶19

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

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The parties have signed the registered Lease Deed dated 01.02.2016 which contains arbitration clause. The petitioner has also caused legal notice dated 23.12.2021 invoking the arbitration clause and suggesting the name of a former Judge of this Court as the sole arbitrator. The respondent is served with the

¶22

¶23

notice of the petition, but there is no response. The necessary ingredients for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are established. Hence, the following:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

[a] The petition is allowed;

¶26

[b] Hon'ble Mr.Justice A.V.Chandrashekar, a Former Judge of this Court, Address: No.406, 3rd Floor, Ramashridhar Apartment, 2nd Cross, 9th Main, BTM Layout 2nd Stage, Bengaluru-560 076, is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent and conduct the proceeding at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru according to the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru.

¶27

¶28

[c] The Registry is directed to communicate this order [by E-mail] to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru and also to Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.V.Chandrashekar, a Former Judge of this Court, as required under the Appointment of Arbitrators by the Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court Scheme, 1996.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

SA/-

Ibibo Group Private Limited v. Economic Transport Organization Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibibo Group Private Limited v. Economic Transport Organization 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

Smt Manjula Vs Sri G. Muniraju

M/S Laskmi Venkteshwara Constructions Vs Union of India

M/S M v v Satyanarayana Vs Union of India

Thakranaika Vs the President

C. S. Chandrashekar Vs Sri. Krishnappa

Smt Mimi Parthasarathy Vs Sri M a Sreenivasan