Allowed

M R Seetharam v. Sri K G Venkatesh

Karnataka HC18 Jul 2022CMP/349/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil miscellaneous petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, the High Court of Karnataka allowed the petition and appointed a sole arbitrator to determine the quantity and quality of matter and other disputes between partners arising from partition and property inclusion in the firm's books.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed; Sri. M C Jayakirthi is appointed as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference and conduct proceedings.

M R Seetharam Vs Sri K G Venkatesh — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

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

¶5

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.349/2022

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

SRI. M. R. SEETHARAM AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS S/O LATE RAMAIAH R/AT "GOKULA", MATHIKERE BANGALORE - 560 054.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(By SRI. G. KRISHNAMURTHY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. G.K.BHAVANA., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

SRI. K. G. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS S/O LATE K. G. GIRISA R/AT SREEKRUPA, NO. 8-9 2^ND MAIN, 5^TH BLOCK KUMARA PARK WEST BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶12

SRI. N. VIJAYA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O D. R. NEELAPPA REDDY R/A NO. 314/2, 3^RD MAIN 2^ND CROSS, DOMLUR LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 071.

¶13

¶14

SMT. PADMINI VIJAYAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/O SRI. N VIJAYA KUMAR R/A 314/2, 3^RD MAIN 2^ND CROSS, DOMLUR LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 071.

¶15

SMT. SARASWATHI M.V. AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS W/O VINAYAK, D/O K.G. VENKATESH RESIDING AT NO.29/2, 2^ND MAIN CKC GARDEN, MISSION ROAD CROSS BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶16

SMT. SONAM M.V AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS W/O VARUN D/O K.G. VENKATESH RESIDING AT NO.75, 3^RD CROSS LALBAGH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 027. (By SRI. SAMPATH A.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 & R3 ARE SERVED)

¶17

... RESPONDENTS

¶18

THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS OR AN ARBITRATOR ACCEPTABLE TO ALL THE PARTIES TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE IN RESPECT OF THE AGREEMENTS DATED 04/05/2001 AND 15/10/2001 (ANNEXURE-A AND B RESPECTIVELY).

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This petition is filed for appointment of a sole Arbitrator for resolution of the dispute relating to Agreements dated 04.05.2001 and 15.10.2001. These agreements are Deed of Partnership and Agreement admitting New Partners. The petitioner and the first to third respondents are partners of the firm in terms of these two agreements, and they have agreed for resolution of all disputes by arbitration.

¶23

The dispute inter se parties is because the petitioner alleges that the property bearing Municipal No.01, measuring 81,075 square feet, Bannerghatta Main Road, Corporation Ward No.170, Ward Name - Jayanagar East, [Formerly, Sy. No.47/1A, 14/1B, 48/5B and 48/6B, Tavarekere Village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru City [the subject property] is brought into the firm's books and therefore all the partners must have a claim. The fourth and fifth respondents, who are

¶24

¶25

impleaded as respondents, are daughters of the first respondent, who have filed a suit for partition which is decided by a compromise decree. The fourth and fifth respondents would be entitled for the subject property in terms of the compromise decree. Thus, the dispute over the subject property encompasses all the parties to the proceedings.

¶26

Sri G. Krishnamurthy, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri. A. Sampath, the learned counsel for the first, fourth and fifth respondents, submit that the parties have agreed for settlement, but finer aspects of the settlement have to be worked out and the parties would require the assistance of an Arbitrator to work out the differences and if necessary, to decide on the same. They also submit that Sri. M C Jayakirthi, a learned Member of the Bar from Bengaluru, could be appointed as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute and draw

¶27

¶28

necessary Award, after adjudication if required and they also submit that the arbitral proceedings could be adhoc proceedings as decided by the learned Arbitrator as regards the venue, the procedure and the cost. In the light of these unanimous submissions, the following:

¶29

ORDER

¶30

[a] The petition is allowed. [b] Sri. M C Jayakirthi, a learned Member of the Bar at Bengaluru, Address: No.99,

¶31

17^th Cross, M.C. Road, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru - 560 040, is appointed as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute and to conduct necessary adhoc arbitral proceedings in terms of the procedure agreed by the parties.

¶32

[c] The registry is directed to communicate

¶33

this order to Sri. M C Jayakirthi, a learned Member of the Bar at Bengaluru, Address:

¶34

¶35

No.99, 17^th Cross, M.C. Road, Vijayanagar,

¶36

Bengaluru - 560 040.

¶37

Sd/JUDGE

¶38

AN/-

M R Seetharam v. Sri K G Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M R Seetharam v. Sri K G Venkatesh

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

Mr K Mohan Raju Vs Atria Convergence Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

Smt a Vinovathi Bai Vs Sri M Jayaram

M/S Housing Development Finance Vs Mr S v Bharath

Sri. S Hanumantha Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Shri Rajendra Patil Vs the Deputy Commissioner

M/S. Ramya Reprographic Pvt. Ltd., Vs Smt. Bindu. P