Near Sun City, Glendale School, Hydershakote, Rajendranagar, Don Bosco Nagar, K v. Ranga Reddy District

9. Smt. B. Shoba Reddy, W/o B. Rajeshwar Reddy, Aged 55 years, Occ. Business, House No.'1 6-1 -30 I 1 I 42182, lndra Prastha Colony, Phase-ll, Saidabad, Hyderabad, Telangana State - 500 059

10. Suresh Kumar Kakkirala, S/o Damodar Kakkirala, Aged 53 Years, Occ. Business, No 214, Maple Town, P & T Colony, Near Sun City, Glendale School, Hydershakote, Rajendranagar, Don Bosco Nagar, K. V. Ranga Reddy District - 500086

11. Vijaya MaReddy, W/o Krishna Reddy, Aged 47 Years, Occ. Business, Rl/o Villa No.167, Maple Town, Bandlaguda Jagir, Near Glendale School, Gandipet, Sikinderguda, K.V. Ranga Reddy District - 500 086 ...Respondents Application under Section 11 (5) & (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 't 996 r/w Scheme for Appointment of Arbitrator and Conciliation Act 2006 r/w Scheme for Appointment of Arbitrators 2006 praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased (i) To appoint an Arbitrator in terms of clause 20 of the Development Agreement cum GPA no. 3253/2019 dated 28-03-2019 to adjudicate the claims and disputes between the applicant and the respondents; (ii) To award costs of the application; Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Sunita Nawandar Counsel for the Respondent No 'l to 5 : Sri Madhavi Priya Mantena Counsel for the Respondent No 6 & 8 : Sri P Vidhyadhar Goud The Court made the following Order: HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE K. LAKSHMAN ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.26L of 2o24 ORDER: The present Arbitration Application is filed under Section 11 (5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the Act") seeking appointment of arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties.

2. In compliance with the order, dated 25. 1O.2O24, learned counsel for the applicant has liled proof of service uide USR No.l 14353 of 2024, dated 21.t1.2O24, Ms.M.Madhavi Priya, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and Sr-i p.Vidhyadhar Goud, learned counsel accepts notice on beha_lf of respondent Nos.6 and 8. Despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.7. With regard to respondent No.9, the cover is returned un- served with an endorsement insufficient address. Sending notice to the address available in respect of respondent No.9 is sufficient in terms of Section 2Z of tine I I ) AA.261 202 General Clauses Act. With regard to respondent No.1O cover returned, un-served with an endorsement urefusal" and refusal amounts to service in terms of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. With regard to respondent No. 11 the cover returned as the "addressee left".

3. Ms.M.Madhavi Priya and Sri P.Vidyadhar Goud, learned counsel, on instructions, reported no counter and no objection for appointing arbitrator by allowing this application. According to them, there are disputes between the applicant and respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 6 and 8, which are arbitrable in nature. +. Applicant and respondents entered into the development agreement-cum-G.P.A.No.3235 of 2019, dated 28.03.2019 for the purpose of development of 2,1OO square yards out of total land admeasuring Acs.2.15.34 guntas forming part of Sy.No.296/lu, situated at Puppallaguda Village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, on specific terms and conditions me ntioned therein. According to the applicant, KL,J AA 261 2024 respondents/developer has to complete the construction in terms of the said agreement. There is delay ln compliance of the agreement. Therefore, there is a substantial delay in completion of the said project in terms of the said agreement. They have to pay delay charges, but they have not paid.

5. Whereas, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and 6 and 8, on instructions would submit that the applicant is demanding an arnount of Rs.4O/- per square feet and they have agreed to pay Rs. 1O/- per square feet. However, the applicant is not accepting. Thus, aforesaid facts would reveal that there are disputes between the applicant and respondents. According to respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and 6 and 8, they have agreed to pay an amount of Rs.10/- per square feet instead of Rs.4O/- per square feet as demanded by the applicant. I AA 261 202

6. Clause 20 of the said agreement deals with "Dispute Resolution" and the same is relevant and is extracted below:- "Any disputes and/or differences whatsoever that may arise under or in connection with the terms and conditions of this DGPA which would not be settlecl by the parties through negotiations, shall be finally settled by way of Arbitration proceedings by mutually appointed sole Arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Such arbitration proceedings shall be held at Hyderabad."

7. Invoking the said clause, applicant has issued notice, dated 16.Oa.2024 to respondents proposing appointment of Sri B.Jagannadha Reddy, retired District Judgc as Sole Arbitrator. Vide reply, dated 17.09.2024 respondent No. I stated that the applicant on one hand proposing to cancel the development agreement and also seeking appointment of arbitrator and the same are contradictory. Except that there is no objection to them. The applicant has already filed all application under I I I I KL,J A,1\ 261 2024 l Section 9 of the Act uide A.O.P.No.6 of 2025 and the same is pending.

8. As discussed supra, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and 6 and 8, on instructions, would submit that respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 6 and 8 have no objection for appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the applicant and respondent.

9. In the light ol the same, this Court is of the considered view that there are following disputes between the applicant and respondents, the same are arbitrable in nature. 1) Specific delay in completion of t-lee conbtruction. 2) Finalcial problems in completing the project. 3) Termination of the said development agreement. 4) Payment with regard to delay in completion of the project. 6 AA 261 2

10. The said disputes are arbitrable in nature. Therefore. this Court inclined to appoint arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute.

11. Accordingly, this Arbitration Application is allowed. Smt. Justice Kongara Vrjaya Laxmi, former judge, High Court o[ Andhra Pradesh, is appointed as an arbitrator to adjudicate the arbitrable disputes between appticant and respondents. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. Sd/. M. VIJAYA BHASKER JOINT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// f\l ECTION OFFICER To,

1. Sri Justice Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi, Former Judle, High.Court-of Andhra ' F;;;;;i: D iiio.-dz-zs3l6zrFle, Plot No.e, rvpe B. Road No 7, Film Nasar' blr,iiJ rirr" nig* CtuO, lJOilee nirts, UyOerbOad - 500 033, Telangana State iAtong with Affi6avit and Material Papers I I By Special Messenger ]

2. One CC to Sri Sunita Nawandar, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Madhavi Priya Mantena, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to P Vidyadhar Goud, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies YY HIGH COURT DATED:3( 10112025 ORDER ARBAPPL.No.261 ot 2024 ( I q J ) E 9l'A rA oA v z o :- F12 t B ?$5 I ALLOWING THE ARBAPPL ""d* w '). I I I I i