Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

M/S. Ksm Niketan Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt. Muninarasamma — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
M/S. Ksm Niketan Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt. MuninarasammaM/S. Ksm Niketan Pvt. Ltd. v. Smt. Muninarasamma

Disposed¶86

M/S. Ksm Niketan Pvt. Ltd. v. Smt. Muninarasamma

Karnataka HC7 Aug 2025COMAP/71/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

COMAP No. 71/2022 c/w COMAP No. 6/2022; High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; decided 07-08-2025; NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB; bench Anu Sivaraman and Rajesh Rai K (JJ.); parties M/s. KSM Niketan Pvt Ltd (Aditya Kankaria), Muninarasamma, H.A. Satish/Sathish Kumar, H.A. Narendra Kumar, H.A. Srinivas(a), H.A. Somashekar, Renuka, Bhagya, Ambuja, Roopa Rani, Kavitha, M/s. Olympia Real Estates Chennai Pvt Ltd, Mahalakshmi Kailas, Anita Samuel, Vemireddy Prabhakar Reddy, Prashanthi Reddy; advocates Ashutosh Ranjan, P Chinnappa, Madhusudana V, Gautham R, Rajath R Hongal, Sammith S, Joshua H Samuel; S.13(1A) Commercial Courts Act 2015; S.37(1)(b) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; S.9 Arbitration Act 1996 interim application; Order 1 Rule 10 r/w S.151 CPC; Order VI Rule 17 r/w S.151 CPC; Com.A.A.No. 158/2020; Com.A.A No. 94/2020; LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Commercial Court Bengaluru (CCH 86); liberty reserved; parties approached Arbitrator; arbitral award passed; nothing survives; appeals closed; parties to work out remedies in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Both commercial appeals (COMAP No. 71/2022 and COMAP No. 6/2022) closed as nothing survived for consideration following the passing of the arbitral award; parties permitted to work out their remedies in accordance with law. ¶86

Why is it important?

Since, pursuant to the liberty reserved, the parties had approached the Arbitrator and an arbitral award has been passed, nothing survives for consideration in these appeals. ¶85

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both commercial appeals (COMAP No. 71/2022 and COMAP No. 6/2022) closed as nothing survived for consideration following the passing of the arbitral award; parties permitted to work out their remedies in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether anything survives for consideration in COMAP No. 71 of 2022 and COMAP No. 6 of 2022 after the parties, pursuant to the liberty reserved, approached the Arbitrator and an arbitral award was passed.

Court's answer

Since, pursuant to the liberty reserved, the parties had approached the Arbitrator and an arbitral award has been passed, nothing survives for consideration in these appeals.

Ratio / Principle

The appeals are accordingly closed, and the parties are permitted to work out their remedies in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (Division Bench: Anu Sivaraman and Rajesh Rai K, JJ.), oral judgment dated 07-08-2025 in COMAP No. 71 of 2022 c/w COMAP No. 6 of 2022: Both commercial appeals, filed under S.13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 r/w S.37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside the judgment/order dated 26/10/2021 in Com.A.A.No. 158/2020 and the common orders dated 26/10/2021 in Com.A.A No. 94/2020 (arising from a Section 9 application and I.A.Nos. 3 and 4) of the LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Commercial Court, Bengaluru (CCH 86), were closed. On joint submission by learned counsel on either side that, pursuant to the liberty reserved, the parties had approached the Arbitrator and an arbitral award had been passed, the Court held that nothing survived for consideration in the appeals, closed them, and permitted the parties to work out their remedies in accordance with law.

A

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 71 OF 2022

C/W

COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 6 OF 2022

IN COMAP No. 71/2022

BETWEEN:

M/S. KSM NIKETAN PVT LTD

Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS ADMN OFFICE AT NO.74, KIADB INDUSTRIAL AREA 4^TH PHASE, MALUR -563 130, KOLAR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR & AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI. ADITYA KANKARIA

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. ASHUTOSH RANJAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P CHINNAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. MUNINARASAMMA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, W/O LATE SRI. H.C ANJANAPPA RESIDING AT NO.232

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

MARUTHI KRUPA VILLAGE, HAGADUR WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560 066

SRI. H.A SATHISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI. H.C. ANJANPPA RESIDING AT HIMARSHA NILAYA PENT HOUSE, BLOCK 'B' VIJETHA ELYSIUM APARTMENTS HAGADUR MAIN ROAD WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560 066

SRI. H.A NARENDRA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O LATE H.C. ANJANAPPA RESIDING AT PENT HOUSE BLOCK 'E', VIJETHA ELYSIUM HAGADUR MAIN ROAD, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560 066

SMT RENUKA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, W/O SRI. G. MUNIYAPPA RESIDING AT FLAT NO.103, BLOCK 'A' VIJETHA ELYSIUM APARTMENTS HAGADUR ROAD, WHITE FIELD BANGALORE-560 066

SMT BHAGYA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, W/O SRI. K.S NARAYANASWAMY RESIDING AT CHANDAN NIVAS KARIMARIYAMMA TEMPLE ROAD WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560 066

SMT AMBUJA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, W/O SRI RAMESH RESIDING AT NO.68/40 DODDAIH LAYOUT ULSOOR JOGUPALYA

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

BANGALORE-560 008

SRI. H.A. SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI. H.C ANJANAPPA RESIDING AT MARUTHI KRUPA HAGADUR, WHITEFIELD BANGALORE-560 066

SRI. H.A. SOMASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI. H.C ANJANAPPA RESIDING AT PENT HOUSE BLOCK 'D', VIJETHA ELYSIUM APARTMENTS HAGADUR MAIN ROAD, WHITEFIELD BANGALORE-560 066

SMT. ROOPA RANI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, W/O SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR GOWDA RESIDIGN AT 'HONGIRANANA NILAYA' THANISANDRA, SHIVARAMA KARANTH NAGAR POST BANGALORE-560 045

SMT. KAVITHA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, W/O K.M. CHAKRAPANI RESIDING AT NO.1298 RAJARAJESWARI ROAD, KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD VIRUPAKSHAPURA BANGALORE-560 097

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MADHUSUDANA V AND SRI. GAUTHAM R, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1-R4 & R6-R10)

THIS COMAP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1A) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 R/W SECTION 37(1)(B) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE SAID JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26/10/2021, PASSED IN COM.A.A.NO. 158/2020, ON THE FILE

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

OF THE LEARNED LXXXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND COMMERCIAL COURT AT BENGALURU (CCH 86) AND ALLOWING THE ABOVE APPEAL, AND THE APPLICATION AS FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE COURT BELOW AND ETC.

IN COMAP NO. 6/2022

BETWEEN:

SMT. MUNINARASAMMA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS (SENIOR CITIZEN BENIFIT NOT CLAIMED) W/O LATE SRI. H.C ANJINAPPA NO.232, MARUTHIKRUPA VILLAGE HAGADUR, WHITEFIELD BENGALURU-560 066 (REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER SRI. H.A. SATISH KUMAR)

SRI. H.A SATISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O LATE SRI H.C ANJINAPPA HIMARSHA NILAYA, PENTHOUSE BLOCK 'B', VIJETHA ELYSIUM APARTMENTS. HAGADUR MAIN ROAD WHITELFIELD, BENGALURU-560 066

SRI. H.A SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O LATE SRI. H.C ANJINAPPA MARUTHI KRUPA, HAGADUR WHITELFIELD, BENGALURU-560 066

SRI. H.A NARENDRA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O LATE SRI. H.C ANJINAPPA PENTHOUSE, BLOCK 'E' VIJETHA ELYSIUM APARTMENTS HGADUR MAIN ROAD, WHITEFIELD BENGALURU-560 066

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

H.A SOMASHEKAR

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O SHRI. H.C ANJINAPPA PENTHOUSE, BLOCK 'D' VIJETHA ELYSIUM, HGADUR MAIN ROAD, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU-560 066

SMT. ROOPA RANI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS W/O CHANDRASHEKAR GOWDA 'HONGIRANA NILAYA' THANISANDRA, SHIVARAMA KARANTH NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 045

SMT AMBUJA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS W/O SHRI. RAMESH NO.68/40, DODDAIAH LAYOUT ULSOOR, JOGUPALYA BENGALURU-560 008

SMT. RENUKA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS W/O SRI. G. MUNIYAPPA FLAT NO.103, BLOCK 'A' VIJETHA ELYSIUM APARTMENTS HAGADUR MAIN ROAD WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU-560 056

SMT. KAVITHA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS W/O SHRI. K.M CHAKRAPANI NO.1298, RAJARAJESHWARI ROAD KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD VIRUPAKSHAPURA, BENGALURU-560 097

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. RAJATH R HONGAL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SAMMITH. S, ADVOCATE)

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

AND:

M/S KSM NIKETAN PVT LTD A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 9A, ESPLANNADE EAST KOLKATTA-700 069

ALSO AT: 688, 1^ST FLOOR 9^TH A MAIN ROAD 1^ST STAGE, INDIRANAGAR BENGALURU-560 038 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. ADITYA KANKARIA

M/S OLYMPIA REAL ESTATES CHENNAI PVT.LTD A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT OLYMPIA TECHONOOLGY PARK NO.1 SIDCO INDUSTRIAL AREA CHENNAI-600 032 REP BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. PRAKASH CHAND

SMT. MAHALAKSHMI KAILAS W/O SRI. S. KAILAS AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS NO 10, IODO KHAN STREET T. NAGAR, CHENNAI 600017

SMT. ANITA SAMUEL W/O PHILIP SAMUEL AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS NO 103, 4^TH MAIN DOMLUR, BENGALURU-560 071

SRI. VEMIREDDY PRABHAKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

S/O SIVA KOTA REDDY

SMT. PRASHANTHI REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS W/O SRI VEMIREDDY PRABHAKAR REDDY

BOTH RESPONDENT NOS. 5 AND 6 RESIDING AT PLOT NO.558 KINGS COURT AVENUE MUGUNTA LAYOUT NELLORE-524 003

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. ASHUTOSH RANJAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P. CHINNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI. JOSHUA H SAMUEL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R3 & R4)

THIS COMAP IS FILED U/S 13(1A) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015, R/W SECTION 37(1)(B) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE COMMON ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED LXXXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-86) DATED 26/10/2021 ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANTS UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AND ALSO I.A.NO. 3 FILED BY THE APPELLANTS UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 R/W SECTION 151 OF THE CPC, 1908 AND I.A.NO. 4 FILED BY THE APPELLANTS UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 R/W 151 OF THE CPC, 1908 IN COM.A.A NO. 94/2020 AS CONTAINED IN ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:31002-DB COMAP No. 71 of 2022 C/W COMAP No. 6 of 2022

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on either

side that, pursuant to the liberty reserved, the parties had approached the Arbitrator and that an arbitral award has also been passed. In the above view of the matter, nothing survives for consideration in these appeals.

The appeals are accordingly closed .

Parties are permitted to work out their remedies in

accordance with law.

SD/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

SD/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether anything survives for consideration in COMAP No. 71 of 2022 and COMAP No. 6 of 2022 after the parties, pursuant to the liberty reserved, approached the Arbitrator and an arbitral award was passed.medium confidence¶85
The court held
Since, pursuant to the liberty reserved, the parties had approached the Arbitrator and an arbitral award has been passed, nothing survives for consideration in these appeals.ratio¶85

Statutes considered

6 provisions across 4 enactments

AI extract

Commercial Courts Act, 201513(1A)¶40
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 199637(1)(b)¶40 9¶77
CPC, 1908Order 1 Rule 10 r/w Section 151¶77 Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151¶77
Companies Act, 1956COMPANIES ACT, 1956¶17

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment and order dated 26/10/2021 passed in Com.A.A.No. 158/2020 (challenged in COMAP 71/2022) and common orders dated 26/10/2021 in Com.A.A No. 94/2020 (challenged in COMAP 6/2022), by the LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Commercial Court at Bengaluru (CCH 86).¶40
LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Commercial Court at Bengaluru (CCH 86) · 26/10/2021
Prior proceeding
Application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the appellants in Com.A.A No. 94/2020 before the LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-86).¶77
Prior proceeding
I.A.No. 3 filed by the appellants under Order 1 Rule 10 r/w Section 151 CPC, 1908 and I.A.No. 4 filed by the appellants under Order VI Rule 17 r/w 151 CPC, 1908 in Com.A.A No. 94/2020.¶77
Prior proceeding
Pursuant to liberty reserved, the parties approached the Arbitrator and an arbitral award was passed, rendering the appeals infructuous.¶85

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
M/S. KSM NIKETAN PVT LTD¶15
Ashutosh Ranjan
respondent
SMT. MUNINARASAMMA¶21
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SRI. H.A SATHISH KUMAR¶25
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SRI. H.A NARENDRA KUMAR¶26
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SMT RENUKA¶27
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SMT BHAGYA¶28
respondent
SMT AMBUJA¶29
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SRI. H.A. SRINIVASA¶34
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SRI. H.A. SOMASHEKAR¶35
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SMT. ROOPA RANI¶36
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
respondent
SMT. KAVITHA¶37
Madhusudana V, Gautham R
appellant
SMT. MUNINARASAMMA¶47
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
SRI. H.A SATISH KUMAR¶48
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
SRI. H.A SRINIVAS¶49
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
SRI. H.A NARENDRA KUMAR¶50
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
H.A SOMASHEKAR¶54
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
SMT. ROOPA RANI¶55
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
SMT AMBUJA¶56
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
SMT. RENUKA¶57
Rajath R Hongal
appellant
SMT. KAVITHA¶58
Rajath R Hongal
respondent
M/S KSM NIKETAN PVT LTD¶64
Ashutosh Ranjan
respondent
M/S OLYMPIA REAL ESTATES CHENNAI PVT.LTD¶66
respondent
SMT. MAHALAKSHMI KAILAS¶67
Joshua H Samuel
respondent
SMT. ANITA SAMUEL¶68
Joshua H Samuel
respondent
SRI. VEMIREDDY PRABHAKAR REDDY¶69
respondent
SMT. PRASHANTHI REDDY¶73

Coram

AI extract

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anu Sivaramanauthor¶83
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai Kmember¶81

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 7 Aug 2025 · August
Registered: 14 Feb 2022
Case no.: COMAP/71/2022
CNR: KAHC010072822022
Topic: Arbitration
Bench: Anu Sivaraman Rajesh Rai K
Disposal: DISPOSED
Case type: COMAP

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Anu Sivaraman Rajesh Rai K

Sri R Rajanna Since Dead by Lrs, Smt. Micheal Rani Vs M/S Dwaraka Builders and Developers
6 Aug 2025
Dileepa M.R. Vs the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited
6 Aug 2025
Mr Vidur Chandy Vs Mr Tushar Girinath
6 Aug 2025
Sri S Umesh Vs Sri Rajendra Kumar Kataria
7 Aug 2025
National Highways Authority of India Vs K B Abdul Khader
7 Aug 2025
Smt Kanta Devangavi Vs Prof Naveen Kumar
7 Aug 2025

Cite this judgement

M/S. Ksm Niketan Pvt. Ltd. v. Smt. Muninarasamma, COMAP/71/2022 (KA), decided on 7 August 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes6

Commercial Courts Act, 201513(1A)
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 199637(1)(b) · 9
CPC, 1908Order 1 Rule 10 r/w Section 151 · Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151
Companies Act, 1956COMPANIES ACT, 1956

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Judgment and order dated 26/10/2021 passed in Com.A.A.No. 158/2020 (challenged in COMAP 71/2022) and common orders dated 26/10/2021 in Com.A.A No. 94/2020 (challenged in COMAP 6/2022), by the LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Commercial Court at Bengaluru (CCH 86).LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Commercial Court at Bengaluru (CCH 86) · 26/10/2021
Application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the appellants in Com.A.A No. 94/2020 before the LXXXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-86).
I.A.No. 3 filed by the appellants under Order 1 Rule 10 r/w Section 151 CPC, 1908 and I.A.No. 4 filed by the appellants under Order VI Rule 17 r/w 151 CPC, 1908 in Com.A.A No. 94/2020.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Anu Sivaraman and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Rai K

Parties & counsel