-1-

CMP No. 66 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 66 OF 2023

BETWEEN:

1. MR. BHAGWAN SINGH M R

S/O LATE M R RAJA SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
R/AT NO.522, 20TH MAIN
35TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 4TH T BLOCK
BANGALORE-560041.

2. MR. SOURABH SINGH M R

S/O BHAGWAN SINGH M R,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT NO.522, 20TH MAIN
35TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 4TH T BLOCK
BANGALORE-560041
REP. BY MR. BHAGWAN SINGH.

3. SMT. ROOPA BHAGWAN SINGH

Digitally signed
by
MARIGANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
PREMAKUMARI W/O MR. BHAGWAN SINGH M R
Location: HIGH
COURT OF R/AT NO.522, 20TH MAIN
KARNATAKA
35TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 4TH T BLOCK
BANGALORE-560041
REP. BY MR. BHAGWAN SINGH.
…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI RISHI N UMESH, ADV.)

AND:
MRS. VEENA B S
W/O SRI K YASHWANTH SINGH
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
 -2-
CMP No. 66 of 2023

R/AT NO 1219 (OLD NO.),

NEW NO.5/11, 1ST MAIN,
1ST CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU -560040.
…RESPONDENT
(BY Ms. RASHMI M. RAO, ADV.)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF

ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO A.
APPOINT HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI. JUSTICE B.A PATIL (RETD)
AS A SOLE ARBITRATOR IN THE PRESENT MATTER OR ANY
OTHER SOLE ARBITRATOR AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM
FIT AND REFER THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND
THE RESPONDENT TO ARBITRATION AS PER CLAUSE 18 OF
THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 26.11.2021 REGISTERED
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT (VIDE
ANNEXURE-C) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Rishi N. Umesh for

petitioners and learned counsel Ms.Rashmi M. Rao for

respondent. Perused the petition papers.

2. Petitioners are before this Court under Section 11(5)

of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short

1996 Act) praying for appointment of sole arbitrator to

resolve the dispute between the parties in terms of Clause

18 of Partnership Deed dated 26.11.2021 (Annexure-C).

 -3-
CMP No. 66 of 2023

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that

Clause (18) of the Deed of Partnership provides for

resolution of dispute by arbitration. Petitioners invoked

arbitration Clause and issued notice in terms of

Annexure-Y dated 25.11.2022 seeking consent for

appointment of Sole Arbitrator to resolve dispute among

the parties. It is submitted that the respondent replied on

27.12.2022 (Annexure-Z) stating that dispute between the

parties are not arbitrable dispute and that respondent

would not consent for appointment of sole arbitrator.

4. Clause 18 of the Deed of Partnership dated

26.11.2021 reads as follows:

“18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: Disputes if any,

arising between and amongst the partners in
respect of the conduct of the business of
partnership or in respect of the items, contents,
interpretations, operation or enforcement of
any of the terms and conditions of this deed or
in respect of any other matter, cause or thing
whatsoever set out herein or otherwise provide
for shall be referred to and settled by
 -4-
CMP No. 66 of 2023

arbitration under the provisions of the

Arbitration Act in force for the time being and it
shall not be competent for any of the partners
to take any matter to the Court of Law for relief
without referring the same to arbitration and
the arbitration proceedings shall be conducted
by the Sole Arbitrator in Bengaluru City. ”

The above clause provides for resolution of dispute

between the parties by arbitration under the provisions of

1996 Act.

5. The petitioners under notice dated 25.11.2022 raised

a dispute and sought consent for appointment of sole

arbitrator which is negated by the respondent under reply

dated 27.12.2022 stating that there is no arbitrable

dispute. Further, learned counsel for the respondent

submitted that various cases including

Com.A.A.No.105/2023 before the Commercial Court are

pending between the parties.

6. Clause 18 of Deed of Partnership dated 26.11.2021

provides for resolution of dispute between the parties by

 -5-
CMP No. 66 of 2023

arbitration. Whether there is arbitrable dispute or not

could be raised before the Arbitrator.

7. In the above facts and circumstances, I am of the

view that conditions for exercise of jurisdiction under

Section 11(5) of 1996 Act are satisfied and it would be

necessary to appoint sole arbitrator to resolve dispute

among the parties. Hence, the following:

ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) Shri Justice Pradeep D. Waigankar, No.101,

Green Leaf Raaga Apartments, 11th Main,

14th “A” Cross, Malleshwaram,

Bengaluru-560003, is appointed as Sole

Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute

between the petitioners and respondent

and conduct proceedings at Arbitration and

Conciliation Centre (Domestic and

International) Bengaluru, according to the

Rules governing Arbitration and Conciliation

 -6-
CMP No. 66 of 2023

Centre (Domestic and International)

Bengaluru.

(iii) Registry is directed to communicate this

order (by E-mail) to the Arbitration and

Conciliation Centre (Domestic and

International) Bengaluru and also to

Shri Justice Pradeep D. Waigankar, as

required under the Appointment of

Arbitrators by the Chief Justice of

Karnataka High Court Scheme, 1996.

Sd/-
JUDGE

MPK
CT:bms
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52