Allowed

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited v. Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Karnataka HC12 Feb 2026CMP/568/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to appoint an arbitrator. The court found a valid arbitration clause in the loan agreement where respondents failed to respond to the notice, leading to the nomination of the agreed-upon sole arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sri. D.R. Venkatasudarshan, District Judge (retired) as the sole arbitrator to resolve the dispute.

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited Vs Sri… — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶8

CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 568 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE

¶11

Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED AND REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT GROUND FLOOR, CRESCENT 1, PRESTIGE SHANTINIKETAN WHITEFIELD, HOODI, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560048 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. JOCKINS RC …PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. THAKUR RISHABH RAJ., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

SRI BUDDHA ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD.,

¶16

HOUSE NO.87-1388-N,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

HC-KAR

SHESHADRI NAGAR

HOUSING BOARD COLONY

KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH-518002

¶23

KODITHAM RAJASEKHAR

¶24

87-1388-N, SHESHADRI NAGAR NEAR NANDYAL CHECK POST, SHESHADRI NAGAR

¶25

KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH-518002

¶26

KODITHAM VARA LAKSHMI

¶27

87-1388-N, NDK ROAD, NDL CHEK POST, SHESHADRI NAGAR

¶28

KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH-518002.

¶29

…RESPONDENTS

¶30

(R1, R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED)

¶31

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTES AND DIFFERENCES AMONGST THE PARTIES IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 21 OF THE LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT DATED 17.12.2024 BEARING NO.808/70004696 AT ANNEXURE B EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS.

¶32

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

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶36

ORAL ORDER

¶37

The petitioner filed this Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’) for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 21 of the loan and security agreement dated 17.12.2024, vide Annexure-B as per the provisions of the Act.

¶38

Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

¶39

The petitioner and respondents had entered into a loan agreement dated 17.12.2024 and have availed a loan amount of ₹1,40,18,400/- which was to be repaid together with interest in 48 equal monthly installments at ₹3,68,026/- per month commencing from 15.02.2025, and thereby ending on 15.12.2028. That, time was the essence

¶40

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

of contract and the respondents were duty bound to pay EMIs on stipulated time, failing which, the respondents were liable for the overdue charges on the defaulted amount and other necessary charges incurred due to default in payment.

¶43

In the loan and security agreement clause 21 provides an arbitration clause, according to which, if any dispute arose between the parties to the petition, the same shall be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice to respondents on 08.08.2025 vide Annexure-E. Despite the service of arbitration notice, the respondents did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence, this petition.

¶44

A notice was issued to the respondents.

¶45

Despite the service of notice, the respondents remained unrepresented.

¶46

¶47

NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶50

and perused the records.

¶51

The point that would arise for consideration is as follows:

¶52

“Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitration in terms of clause 21 of the loan and security agreement vide Annexure-B, as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the Rules?

¶53

It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and respondents have entered into a loan agreement dated 17.12.2024, wherein the petitioner has advanced loan of amount of ₹1,40,18,400/- and time was the essence of contract for repayment of the loan amount along with the interest. The respondents committed a default in making

¶54

payments on the petitioner. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause as per clause 21 of the loan and security

¶55

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

agreement, by issuing a notice dated 08.08.2025, which

¶59

reads as follows:

¶60

21.2 Any dispute/s arising out of or in connection with this contract, including any question regarding its existence, validity, interpretation, or termination thereof, shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration of a sole Arbitrator as per the provisions of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. The parties by mutual agreement have appointed and named the sole Arbitrator who shall be Mr. Sri. D.R.Venkatasudarshan, Dist. & Sessions Judge (Retd), Bengaluru. The sole Arbitrator's consent is also obtained before appointment and therefore he can enter upon the reference the moment one of the parties approach him for interim measures/ final award.

¶61

From the perusal of the arbitration clause, if the

¶62

dispute arises between the parties to the petition, the said dispute shall be resolved through an arbitration and also agreed for the name of the arbitrator i.e., by name Mr. D.R. Venkatasudarshan, District and Sessions Judge (Retd). There is an arbitration clause and the dispute arose between the parties to the petition, and same has to be resolved through an arbitrator. Hence, the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the arbitral dispute to the

¶63

¶64

NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

arbitrator. Accordingly, the point is answered in the

¶67

affirmative .

¶68

In view of the above discussion, I proceed to

¶69

pass the following order:

¶70

ORDER

¶71

i. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed .

¶72

ii. Sri. D.R.Venkatasudarshana, District Judge (retired) is nominated as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 21 of the loan and security agreement vide Annexure-B as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Rules.

¶73

iii. The Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator and the Arbitrator, the Director and the Arbitration and Conciliation Center, Bangalore.

¶74

iv. The Registry is directed to return the original/certified copy of the documents

¶75

¶76

NC: 2026:KHC:10343 CMP No. 568 of 2025

¶77

HC-KAR

¶78

produced by the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same.

¶79

v. Pending IA(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

¶80

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶81

SSB

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited v. Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Caterpillar Financial Services India Private Limited v. Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

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

Spandana R J Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs. Pragya Mishra Vs M/S. Idbi Bank Limited

Miss Rakshitha P Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs Indumathi G Vs M/S Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

M/S. Valente Lifespace Creators Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S.Hebron Properties Pvt. Ltd.

Smt.Nandini Vs Smfg India Home Finance Company Ltd.