Allowed

Tadakamalla Mohan Rao and another v. M/s Kalyan Ram Rice Industries and 10 others

Telangana HC16 Dec 2023ARBAPPL/60/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An arbitration application filed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve disputes between petitioners and respondents arising from a partnership deed was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sri Justice P. Naveen Rao as arbitrator; miscellaneous applications pending in the application closed.

Tadakamalla Mohan Rao and another Vs M/s Kalyan Ram Rice… — Arbitration | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

]N THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYOERABAD

¶3

SATURDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN^REDDY

¶6

ARBITRATION APPLICATION No:⁶⁰ of²⁰²³

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 . Tadakamalla Mohan Rao, Sio Mallaiah, aged about 60^{years, Business,Rl/o} H. No. 19- 443, Reddy Colony, Miryalaguda, 508207.

¶9

Smt. Tadakamalla Padma, Aged about 58^{years,W/o TadakamallaMohan} Rao, R/o H. No. 19-^2143, Reddy Colony, Miryalaguda,^508207.

¶10

...Petitioners

¶11

AND

¶12

M/s Kalyan Ram Rice lndustries, Yadgarpally, a^{Partnership Firm having its} office a[ Yadgarpally^(Post) Miryalaguda, being^{represented by its Managing} Pa(ner.

¶13

Sri Garlapati Harinath, S/o Mallaiah, 59^{years,Business,R/o 19-382,Reddy} Colony, Miryalaguda, (P & M) Nalgonda^Dist.

¶14

Sri Srirangam Anjaiah, S/o S. Venkaiah, D.No.18-^{5711, Kamalanagar,} Dilskhnagar Hyderabad.

¶15

Smt. Srirangam Vanaja, Wo Srirangam Anjaiah,^{aged about 50 D.No.D.No.} 18- 5711, Kamalanagar, Dilskhnagar Hyderabad.

¶16

Sri Kotagiri Srinivas, S/o Kotagiri Somaiah, aged^{about 52 yearsH.No.l'1-22,} Main Road, Nakrekal Mandal, Nakrekal, Nalgonda Disf^{50821 1.}

¶17

Sri Samudrala Sunanda, W/o S. Anjaneyulu,^{aged about 54 yearsRJo. D. No} 18- 98/1, Kamalanagar, Dilskhnagar Hyderabad.

¶18

Smt. Chanda Jayamma, Wo Ramulu, aged about^{69 years R/o H. No. 18-} 57l 1 , Kamalanagar, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad.

¶19

Sri Samudrala Venkateswarlu, S/o Samudrala^{Somalingam, aged about} 56 years Fl/o. 19- 132, Reddy Colony, Miryalguda Mandal, Miryalguda, Nalgonda Dist- 508207.

¶20

Sri Srirangam Narsaiah, S/o Venkaiah, aged^{about 65 years H. No.7-2112,} Main Road, Nakrekal Mandal, Nakrekal, Nalgonda^Dist- 50821^1.

¶21

10.Sri Vempati Rama Murthy, S/o Ratnaiah, Aged^about 48^{years,R/o. D.No.} 14- l2E, Seetharampuram Miryalaguda, Nalgonda^Dist- 508207.

¶22

: 1

¶23

I II I !I

¶24

'l 1. Manchikanti Laxman, S/o Narsimha, aged about 37 years Rl/o D.No.17- 1- 391/5/555, Singareni Colony, Saidabad, Hyderabad.

¶25

...Respondents

¶26

Arbitration Application Under Section 11 (6) of Arbitration & Concillation Act, 1996, Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the petitioners and respondents.

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI V. SEETHARAMA AVADHANI

¶28

Counsel for the Respondents No.1,3,4,7 & 9: Mr. J. ASWINI KUMAR

¶29

Counsel for the Respondents No.2,6,8,10 &^'t1: Mr. B. MAHENDER REDDY

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent No.s: Mr. CHALAKANI VENKAT YADAV

¶31

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶32

\ il\

¶33

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.60 OF 2023

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

This application is filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short'Act 1996') for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the applicants and the respondents in pursuance of partnership deed dated 01.04.2012.

¶36

Mr. J. Aswini Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 3, 4,7 and 9, Mr. B. Mahender Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2,6, B, 10 and'l^'l , and tr4r. Chalakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel for respondent No.5, have expressed that their clients do not hhve objection for appointment of independent Arbitrator other than the Arbitrator named by the applicants.

¶37

ln view of the above, the arbitration application is allowed appointing Sri Justice P. Naveen Rao, Former Judge, High Court of Telangana, as arbitrator to adjudicate the claims and disputes between the applicants and the respondents and to pass an award in accordance with law.

¶38

The learned Arbitrator is entitled to fees as per the rates specified in the Fourth Schedule to Act'1996, inserted byAct 3 of 2016

¶39

¶40

i It !

¶41

with effect from 23.10.2015, which shall be borne by both parties in

¶42

equal shares.

¶43

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending

¶44

in this arbitration application stand closed.

¶45

SD/. M.VIJAY BHASKAR JOINT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

3v.'

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 Sri Justice P. Naveen Rao, Former Judge of the High Court of Telangana, Block-A, #3001, My Home Bhooja, Plot Nos.22-24 & 31-33, Raidurgam, Hyderabad - 500081, K.V. Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State.^(By Speed Post) (Along with a Copy of affidavit and material^papers)

¶51

One CC to SRI V. SEETHARAMA AVADHANI, Advocate [OPUC]

¶52

J. One CC to Mr. J. ASWINI KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶53

One CC to Mr. B. MAHENDER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Mr. CHALAKANI VENKAT YADAV, Advocate [OPUC]

¶54

Two CD Copies

?r^&.

HIGH COURT

DATED:1611212023

ORDER

ST416
1vrE
q
o
oo 23 sE[ ?08 l>;
i.t
+
t OEOPAl ct\L

¶60

ARBAPPL.No.60 ot 2023

¶61

THE ARBITRATION APPLICATION IS ALLOWED

¶62

@rnn". .-r---\r{ry9'

Tadakamalla Mohan Rao and another v. M/s Kalyan Ram Rice Industries and 10 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tadakamalla Mohan Rao and another v. M/s Kalyan Ram Rice Industries and 10 others

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

M/s. Mathrubhuumi Infra Vs Sri. C. Lakshmikar Reddy

Gundelli Kanakaiah Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

M/s Raghava-Plr (Jv) Vs Smt. a. Santhi Kumari, IAS

K.Aruna Vs The State of Telangana

Kamarouthu Vamshi, Vs Dandugula Maisaih

Ballem Venkateswarlu Vs The state of Telangana and 3 others