Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an arbitrator under the arbitration clause of a 2008 lease agreement. The respondent did not deny existence of the arbitration agreement; the Court appointed a retired District Judge as sole Arbitrator, leaving all contentions open.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:847 CMP No. 124 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 124 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
MR. MOHAMMED AKHTAR S/O MR MOHAMMED SAHEB AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS
R/A C/O MR M BASTI MALIK BASTIBAGH, BASTIPETE KUMTA-581343 UTTARA KANNADA, KARNATAKA
ALSO AT NO.100, IST FLOOR 12A MAIN, 19TH CROSS HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR-7 BENGALURU-560102
…PETITIONER
Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. SUHAS T L., ADVOCATE)
AND:
M/S GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED # 3M, CANNAUGHT ROAD OFFICE QUEENS ROAD TASKAR TOWN BENGALURU-560052
…RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
NC: 2024:KHC:847 CMP No. 124 of 2023
THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER APPOINTING AND REFERRING THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT TO AN ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL, IN VIEW OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT AT CLAUSE IV SUB CLAUSE 6 OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 22/12/2008 AS PER ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has been filed by the petitioner against the respondent seeking appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of the Arbitration Agreement contained at Clause No.IV Sub clause 6 of the Lease Agreement dated 22.12.2008 entered into between the parties.
“In the event of any dispute or difference arising from performance of this Agreement, the same shall,
NC: 2024:KHC:847 CMP No. 124 of 2023
unless settled by mutual discussions, be referred to the Sole Arbitration of a person to be appointed by both the Parties. Such Arbitration shall be conducted in English in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as in force and as amended from time to time. The decision of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding upon the parties. The Sole Arbitrator shall pass his award within 90 days from the date of his entering reference or within such other extended time as the parties may mutually agree upon. The venue of the Arbitration proceeding shall be in Bangalore.”
NC: 2024:KHC:847 CMP No. 124 of 2023
4. The respondent did not send any reply and did
not dispute or deny the existence of arbitration agreement / clause in the contracts entered into between the parties. Subsequently, the parties have not only failed to resolve their disputes but they have also not reached any consensus / agreement for appointment of an arbitrator and as such, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. Even in the present petition, while the respondent has not filed their statement of objections but have disputed and denied the various claims of the petitioner. However, the respondent does not dispute or deny the existence of arbitration agreement / clause in the contracts entered into between the parties.
circumstances, though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to the undisputed fact that there exists an arbitration agreement / clause in the contracts entered into between the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and
NC: 2024:KHC:847 CMP No. 124 of 2023
appropriate to allow this petition by referring the dispute between the parties to arbitration with the consent of both sides by appointing Sri. Veeranna G. Tigadi, a retired District Judge , to act as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as per the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International) at Bengaluru.
ORDER
Judge , is hereby appointed as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties as per the Rules governing the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International) at Bengaluru.
NC: 2024:KHC:847 CMP No. 124 of 2023
maintainability, arbitrability, jurisdiction, limitation, stamp duty, etc., are left/kept open to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal and no opinion is expressed on the same.
Sd/JUDGE
RB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(6) given the arbitration clause in the lease agreement dated 22.12.2008?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohammed Akhtar
M/S GTL Infrastructure Limited
S.R. Krishna Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
