Allowed

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Pvt. Lt v. Sri Abhish Chandhok

Karnataka HC12 Oct 2023CMP/175/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a civil miscellaneous petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, appointing a retired District Judge as sole arbitrator. The Court mandated payment of deficit stamp duty on the impounded lease agreement before accepting the petition from the petitioner who claimed the respondents failed to return the security deposit.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner accepted; Sri V.N. Ravindra appointed as sole arbitrator to conduct proceedings at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru.

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Pvt. Lt Vs Sri… — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:37193 CMP No. 175 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 175 OF 2018

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M/S CONTINENTAL AUTOMOTIVE COMPONENTS INDIA PVT LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.53-B, BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-1, HOSUR RAOD, BANGALORE-560099. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATRORY SRI.KUMARA VADIVEL. …PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI.AJITH N., ADVOCATE AND SRI. AMAN N DRAVID, ADVOCATE)

¶9

Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

AND:

¶11

SRI ABHISH CHANDHOK S/O BANDHU CHANDHOK, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT B-26, SHIVALAYA, BUNGALOWS, OPP. AKSHARDHAM, BUNGALOWS, BEHIND GOVT TUBE WELL, BOPAL, AHMEDABAD-380058.

¶12

SMT ANU CHANDHOK W/O.ABHISH CHANDHSOK, RESIDING AT B-26, SHIVALAYA,

¶13

¶14

NC: 2023:KHC:37193 CMP No. 175 of 2018

¶15

BUNGALOWS, OPP. AKSHARDHAM, BUNGALOWS, BEHIND GOVT TUBE WELL, BOPAL AHMEDABAD-380058.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(VIDE ORDER DATED 20.07.2023 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 IS HLED SUFFICIENT)

¶18

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SEC 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1196, PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ALLOW THE ABOVE PETITION; CONSTITUTE AN ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO DECIDE THE MATTER IS ISSUE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS IN TERMS OF ARTICLE 10 OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 15.05.2012 AT ANNEXURE-A.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner has entered possession of the subject property under an Agreement of Lease dated 15.05.2012 which contains the agreement for arbitration, and this agreement reads as under:

¶22

“The parties thereto will attempt in good faith to resolve through negotiation any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating in any way to this Agreement. All disputes, claim, controversy arising out of this agreement shall be resolved by negotiation of the parties in the first instance, decided at Bangalore by a sole arbitrator appointed by LESSORS in concurrence with the LESSEE in accordance with the Arbitration and

¶23

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:37193 CMP No. 175 of 2018

¶24

Conciliation Act, 1996, in the second instance and by Courts of competent jurisdiction at Bangalore, in the third instance.”

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner, relying upon this agreement and the legal notice dated 10.08.2017 and 19.01.2018, submits that the respondents have not returned security deposit though the petitioner has vacated and handed over possession of the subject property without any dues. As regards invoking the agreement of arbitration, the learned counsel for the petitioner, relies upon the notice dated 19.01.2018.

¶26

The respondents, though served with notice and also the notice of these proceedings, have remained absent. The petitioner has not produced the original of the agreement dated 15.05.2012 and it is stated that the original is retained by the respondents. This Court, after calling for a report from the learned Registrar (Judicial) on the stamp duty paid on this agreement, has impounded the documents now

¶27

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:37193 CMP No. 175 of 2018

¶28

produced and directed the learned Registrar (Judicial) to issue certificate as contemplated under the provisions of Section 37(1) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 after the petitioner pays this deficit stamp duty. The learned Registrar (Judicial) has filed his report stating that the deficit stamp duty and penalty in a sum of Rs.3,300/- is paid and a certificate as contemplated under Section 41 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1947 is also issued to the District Registrar (Stamps) along with an authenticated copy of the subject lease agreement. A copy of this certificate issued is also enclosed. In the circumstances where the petitioner’s case is undisputed and proper stamp duty is paid as aforesaid, the petition is accepted and a retired District Judge is appointed as a sole arbitrator. Hence the following:

¶29

¶30

NC: 2023:KHC:37193 CMP No. 175 of 2018

¶31

ORDER

¶32

[a] The petition is allowed, and Sri.V.N.Ravindra, a retired District Judge, is appointed as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute between the petitioner and respondents and conduct the proceeding at the Arbitration and

¶33

Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru according to the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and

¶34

International), Bengaluru.

¶35

[b] The Registry is directed to communicate this order [through email] to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre and Sri.V.N.Ravindra, a retired District Judge, Address: No.229, Balaji Layout, Vajarahalli, Bynapalya, Kanakapura

¶36

Road, Bengaluru – 560 062 [ email: e-mail: [email protected]], as required under

¶37

¶38

NC: 2023:KHC:37193 CMP No. 175 of 2018

¶39

the Appointment of Arbitrators by the Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court Scheme, 1996.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

SA ct:sr

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Pvt. Lt v. Sri Abhish Chandhok

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Pvt. Lt v. Sri Abhish Chandhok

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

M/S Peekay Roller Folur Mills Vs State of Karnataka

Mercedes-Benz Financial Services India Private Limited Vs Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Arto)

Smt H Mahalakshmi Vs Sri T Rajendra

Sri G S Bhaskar Vs Sri Shantharaju B

R Balaji Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Central Tax

Mr. Vinay Narayanswamy Vs Income Tax Officer