Sri B G Natarajan v. M/S Ample Group

Karnataka HC3 Mar 2026CMP/488/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Arbitrator appointment; Section 11(5) Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; clause 21 Joint Development Agreement dated 29.06.2018 Annexure-A; CMP No. 488 of 2024; Karnataka High Court Bengaluru; Justice E.S. Indiresh; petitioners B.G. Natarajan and N. Kumar; respondents M/s. Ample Group (partner R. Saravana) and K. Ramesh; arbitrator appointed Sri. H.R. Srinivas retired District Judge; appearance before Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Bengaluru on 25.03.2026 at 11.00 a.m.; petition allowed; NC: 2026:KHC:12862.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Sri. H.R. Srinivas, retired District Judge, appointed as Arbitrator; Registry directed to return all original documents after obtaining Photostat copies; petitioners directed to appear before the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru on 25.03.2026 at 11.00 a.m. ¶¶35

Sri B G Natarajan Vs M/S Ample Group — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether an independent Arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, pursuant to clause 21 of the Joint Development Agreement dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure-A), to resolve the dispute between the parties.

¶¶23

Court's answer

The resolution of the dispute between the parties has to be made by an independent Arbitrator, in view of the submissions made as per clause 21 of the Joint Development Agreement dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure-A).

¶¶32

Ratio / Principle

Sri. H.R. Srinivas, retired District Judge, is appointed as Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.

¶¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Misc. Petition No. 488 of 2024 (NC: 2026:KHC:12862), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided 03.03.2026 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice E.S. Indiresh. Petition filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by B.G. Natarajan and N. Kumar against M/s. Ample Group (a partnership firm represented by its partner Mr. R. Saravana) and Mr. K. Ramesh, praying for appointment of a competent person/retired District Judge as Arbitrator as per clause 21 of the Joint Development Agreement dated 29.06.2018 (Annexure-A). Holding that the dispute between the parties had to be resolved by an independent Arbitrator, the Court allowed the petition and appointed Sri. H.R. Srinivas, retired District Judge, as Arbitrator. Registry was directed to return original documents after taking Photostat copies, and the petitioners were directed to appear before the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru on 25.03.2026 at 11.00 a.m. Respondent No.2 was served; notice to Respondent No.1 was dispensed with; both respondents remained unrepresented.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:12862 CMP No. 488 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 488 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. B.G. NATARAJAN, S/O. LATE GANGADHARA MUDALIAR, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS R/A NO.17, CHANNAKRISHNAPPA STREET, PALACE GUTTAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 003.

¶9

SRI. N. KUMAR, S/O. SRI. GANGADHARA MUDALIAR, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/A NO.17, CHANNAKRISHNAPPA STREET, PALACE GUTTAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 003.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI. YADUNANDAN N., ADVOCATE)

¶12

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

¶13

AND:

¶14

M/S. AMPLE GROUP. A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.15, KRISHNAREDDY BUILDING, KADUBISINAHALLI, OUTER RING ROAD, MARATHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 087. REPRESENTED BY IT'S PARTNER MR. R. SARAVANA

¶15

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC:12862 CMP No. 488 of 2024

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

MR. K. RAMESH, S/O. MR. KANAKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶19

R/AT NO.6P,194, THALAMBEDU VILLAGE AND POST, CHITTOOR MANDAL, CHITOOR - 517 419, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶20

ALSO RESIDING AT: 6^TH FLOOR, SITE NO.406, BEML LAYOUT, THURUBARAHALLI, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(R-2 SERVED; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶23

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT ANY COMPETENT PERSON/ RETIRED DISTRICT JUDGE OR ARBITRATORS EMPANELLED IN PANEL OF ARBITRATORS, OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION CENTER, HOUSED AT KANIJA BHAVANA, NO.49, 3^RD FLOOR, EAST WING, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE, AS ARBITRATOR IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND A PASS SUCH OTHER OR DIRECTION THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO PASS UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS PER THE CLAUSE 21 OF JDA, ANNEXURE A DATED 29.06.2018.

¶24

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:12862 CMP No. 488 of 2024

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

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

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶31

petitioners. Notice to respondent Nos.1 and 2 are served but remain unrepresented.

¶32

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as per clause 21 of the Joint Development Agreement dated 29.06.2018, (Annexure - A), I am of the view that the resolution of the dispute between the parties has to be made by an independent Arbitrator.

¶33

In that view of the matter, the Petition is

¶34

allowed .

¶35

Sri. H.R. Srinivas, retired District Judge be hereby appointed as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:12862 CMP No. 488 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Registry is directed to return all original

¶40

documents produced by any of the parties after obtaining Photostat copies of the same.

¶41

The petitioners are directed to appear before

¶42

the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Bengaluru on 25.03.2026 at 11.00 a.m. to enable the learned Arbitrator

¶43

to take further action in the matter.

¶44

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶45

KLV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

Sri B G Natarajan v. M/S Ample Group

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri B G Natarajan v. M/S Ample Group

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Organization for Unaided Recognized Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Vishwanath v M Vs the State Co. Operative

Dr Raksha Jayaram Vs State of Karnataka

Vivekananda Educational and Social Trust Vs the State of Karnataka

The Barakur Educational Society R Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Suresha Vs the Deputy Registrar