Sri. H Shankarkumar Vs the Chief Secretary

SRI. H SHANKARKUMAR S/O LATE HANUMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS CLASS-I PWD CONTRACTOR, AGRAHARA CHWOLAGALA POST, BAGUR HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-5732101 AT PRESENT R/AT NO.968, 2ND CROSS, 4^TH BLOCK, HMT LAYOUT, NAGASANDRA POST BENGALURU-560073.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. S. VENUGOPALA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BENGALURU-560001.

¶15

THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS PORT AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:16011 CMP No. 24 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

K R CIRCLE BENGALURU-560001.

¶20

SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, HASSAN DIVISION HASSAN-573201.

¶21

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HASSAN DIVISION HASSAN-573201.

¶22

ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SMT. LALITA P.M, HCGP)

¶25

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR IN TERMS OF CLAUSE-F 4(1)(A) OF THE KW-4 (STANDARD TENDERED DOCUMENT) ATTACHED TO THE CONTRACT AGREEMENT DATED 21.05.2019 ANNEXURE - A, TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

¶27

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:16011 CMP No. 24 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

Heard Sri. Venugopal, learned counsel appearing

¶34

for the petitioner and Smt. Lalita P.M, learned High Court Government Pleader, appearing for the

¶35

respondents.

¶36

In this petition, the petitioner has sought for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Tender Work Indent as stipulated in the Agreement dated 21.05.2019 (Annexure-A) in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

¶37

Having taken note of the submissions made

¶38

by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and upon perusal of Clause 4 of the Special Conditions of

¶39

4 -

¶40

NC: 2026:KHC:16011 CMP No. 24 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Contract, as stipulated in Agreement dated 21.05.2019 (Annexure-A), I am of the considered opinion that, an Arbitrator is to be appointed to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

¶43

Accordingly, this petition under Section 11 (6) of the Act, 1996 is allowed . Sri. Kukkaje Ramakrishna Bhat, Retired District Judge is appointed to enter into the said reference of Arbitration and act

¶44

as the Sole Arbitrator in the present case in the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International), Bengaluru, as per the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre.

¶45

All claims and contentions of any of the parties are left/kept open to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶46

A copy of this order be sent forthwith to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic &

¶47

5 -

¶48

NC: 2026:KHC:16011 CMP No. 24 of 2024

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

International), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru, for

¶51

proceeding further in the matter.

¶52

Registry is directed to return all original documents produced by any of the parties after obtaining Photostat copies of the same.

¶53

Since the parties are represented through their learned counsel, in order to avoid further delay in the matter, the parties are directed to appear before

¶54

the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre on 15.04.2026

¶55

at 11 am, without waiting for further notice in this regard.

¶56

SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶57

SB

¶58

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

Sri. H Shankarkumar v. the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. H Shankarkumar v. the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Naseema Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Champion Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Lg Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Sri. H B Basavaraju Vs Additional Registrar of Co. Operative

V Krishna Murthy Vs the Registrar of Cooperative Societies

M/S Avinashi Ads Vs M/S Anjana Ads

Basavaraju Vs the State of Karnataka