Plivo Communications Private Limited Vs Arvind Eshwarlal

¶1

1 -

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

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

¶6

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4705/2022 (AA)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PLIVO COMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 2^ND FLOOR, BLOCK-B, EAST WING 77, TOWN CENTRE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 037 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MR. VENU INDURTHI.

¶9

... APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP NAYAK, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

ARVIND ESHWARLAL R/AT NO.106, RAHEJA MANSION, 13^TH MILTON STREET, COOKE TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 005. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A M SHODHAN BABU, ADVOCATE)

¶12

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 37 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT,

¶13

2 -

¶14

AND ORDER XLIII RULE 1(R) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC, 1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.02.2021 PASSED IN A.A.NO. 302/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, (CCH.NO. 13), ALLOWING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996.

¶15

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The applicant in an application under Section 9 of

¶18

the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in A.A.No.302/2018 on the file of the V Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (for short, ' the civil Court ') has preferred this appeal notwithstanding an order of injunction against the respondent. The civil Court has injuncted the respondent from utilizing or disclosing the appellant's "Confidential Information" in public domain until the disposal of CMP No.171/2020.

¶19

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant's grievance is that there could be a time gap between the disposal of CMP

¶20

- 3 -

¶21

No.171/2020 and the learned Arbitrator entering reference of the dispute and in the meanwhile, if there is any disclosure of the appellant's "Confidential Information" , the appellant's right would be frustrated.

¶22

The learned counsels for the parties are heard in the light of this grievance and the learned counsels submit that the petition in CMP No.171/2020 is disposed of on 21.7.2022 appointing a former Judge of this Court as the sole arbitrator with a direction that the question of arbitrability will have to be treated as preliminary issue.

¶23

The learned counsel for the respondent does not contest that the interim protection granted by the civil Court could be extended until appropriate orders in the arbitral proceedings and in fact, he submits that the learned arbitrator may be called upon to simultaneously decide on the preliminary issue of arbitrability and the

¶24

4 -

¶25

application that the appellant may file under Section 17 of the Act for continuation of the interim protection granted by the civil Court until disposal of the arbitral proceedings.

¶26

It is obvious from these submissions that the appeal could be disposed of modifying the impugned order injuncting the respondent from utilizing or disclosing the appellant's "Confidential Information" in public domain until the arbitrator decides both on the preliminary issue as required in terms of the order in CMP No.171/2020 and any application that is filed by the appellant for extension of interim protection granted by the civil Court during the pendency of the arbitral proceedings. But, there cannot be direction for simultaneous consideration of the same.

¶27

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

5 -

¶29

In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending

¶30

application does not survive for consideration and the same is disposed of accordingly.

¶31

SD/JUDGE

¶32

SA Ct:sr

Plivo Communications Private Limited v. Arvind Eshwarlal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Plivo Communications Private Limited v. Arvind Eshwarlal

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

Reach Logistics (P) Limited Vs Bosch Limited

Smt. Harshitha Vs Sri S.Annadorai

Sri Mylaraiah Vs Smt Muni Siddamma

Smt Ashwini K Kulkarni Vs Sri Gundu Rao

Mr. Jitendra Virwani Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S. Urc Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Beml Limited