✦ High Court of India · 11 Apr 2025

Lest serious los,s would ensue to v. Soubhagya Valli representing

Case Details High Court of India · 11 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
11 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,598 words

6. Pamayyagari Bhoopal Goud, S/o. Sri. P. Pandu Goud, aged about 47 years, Occupation. Cultivation, H. No.4-29, Tellapur 502302, Telangana State

7. Pamayyagari Venu Goud, S/o, Sri. P. Pandu Goud, aged about 43 years, Occupation. Cultivation, R/o. Beside Hanuman Temple, Tellapur 5O23O2, Telangana State B. Sri. Pamayyagari Karan Goud, S/o. Sri. (late) P. Gurulingam Goud, aged about 66 years, Occupation. Cultivation, H.No.4-30, Tellapur 502302, Telangana State

9. Pamayyagari Sridhar Goud, S/o. Sri. P. Karan Goud, aged about 44 years, Occupation. Cultivation, H.No.4-5714, Near Pochamma Temple, Tellapur 502302, Telangana State

10. Pamayyagari Arun Goud, S/o Occupation. rlultivation, R/o. 502302, Telangana State S1 P-. !G1an Goud, aged about 43 years, H.No.3-54i2A, Hanunran Tempte, Tdllapur ll.Pamayyagari Santosh Goud,, S/o. Sri. p. Karan Goud aged about 41 Vears. Occupation Cultivation, R/o. H. No. 4-30, Tellapur, Telang-ana State. l2.PAMAYYAGARI MEGHANATH GOUD, S/o Sri (Late) p. Narayana Goud, 3gg9^gb!r] l;6 years, Occupation. Cuttivation,'R/o. H No.4_20, Teilapui 502302, Telangana State. l3.Pamayyagari-Nishanth Qgud _S1o Meghanath Goud, aged about 30 years, Occupation C rltivatron, R/o H.No.4-20, Tellapur 5023Cr2:Telangana St6te '14. Sri. Pamayya(lari Vishat Goud, S/o Sri Meghanath 3oud, aged about 2g years, Occupation Cultivation, H. No.4-26, Besidr: Hanui-ran Temple, Tellapur 502302. Telangana State 15 S.ri Pam-ayyagari Narsing Rao (Babu Goud), s/o. Sri. (late) pamayyagari Venkat Krishn,iah Goud. about 63 years, oc6upation. cultivation, resiii'eni or 9-3/1 , Ramachandrapuram, Tellapui. Sangareddy Distri:1, Telangana State 16. Sri. Pamayyagari Harrsh Goud, s/o. Sri. p. Narsing F:ao Goud, about 36 years, O_ccup.ation. Culhvation, resident of g-3/1-, Ramachandrapuram, Tellapur, Sang,areddy Distrrct, Telangana State 17 Sri JZ Te . Pamayyagari Avinash Goud,, sio. Sri. p. Narsing F:ao Goud, aged about ,.years, Occupatron Cultivation, resident of 9-371 , Ramachanjrapuram, llapur, Sangareddy District, Telangana State 18 Sri.. Pamayyallari Surender Goud, s/o. Sri. (late) pamayyagari Venkat Krishnaiah Gord, aboJt.50 years, occupation. curtivatic,n, reidio6nt ot g-Jlt Ramachand rapuram. Tellapur, Sangareddy District, Telangina State 'l9.sAHlrl coNSl'RUCTIoNS, a registered partnership Fi 'm havinq its Dnncioar place of busin,rss at ptot No 1222, H.NO. B_2_2b3tBZtN122it F4'. Fo,dh Floor, Road No 36, Jubitee^Hills,_Hyderabad 500 033, Tetangani Slite represented by rts Partner, Smt. B. parvathi, Wo. E; Lakshmi Narayana, Hyderabad 500081, Tetangana State. ...ResponaLnts Arbitrat on Apprication fired under Section i i (6) of the Arbitratron and concrliation Act 1996 prayrng that this Hon'ble court rnay be pleased to appoint a Sole Arbitrator for the purpose of adjudication of the disputes that have arisen between Applicant and the Respondents .1 to 1g in rer;pect of the terms of the Agreement of Sale dated 31ro3r2022. Lest serious los,s would ensue to Applicant. Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms. V. Soubhagya Valli representing Counsel for the Respondents : None appeared Sri. V Seetharama Avadhani The Court made the following: ORDER TIIE HON'BIJE TTIE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUTIOY PAUI/ ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.48 of 2o25 ORDER: Ms.V.Soubharya Valli, learned counsel appearing for Sri V.Seetharama Avadhani, learned counsel for the applicant and none appeared for the respondents, despite service of notice.

2. This application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has been filed seeking appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this matter is covered by the order of this Court in Arbitration Application No. 19 of 2025, dated 21.O3.2025 wherein the respondents and the arbitration clause are szune as those in the current application

4. Since, the respondents have not chosen to enter appearance despite service, the matter is frnally heard.

5. This Court in Arbitration Application No.19 of 2025 dated 2I.O3.2025 recorded as under:- "Mrs. V. Soubharya Valli, learned counsel representing Sri V Seetharama Avadhani, learned counsel for the applidlEnt I I 'l 2 Nonc l rr the respondenls, despite service of nottce.

2. This i pplir:ation under Section 11(5) arc. I 1(6) of the Arbitratir n zrnd Conciliation Act, 1996 has bt:e n filed seeking appoinLn't:n t of an arbitrator to adjudica tr: t he dispute betu,een Ihe parties.

3. Admittcdly, the parties have entered into an Agrcement for Sale datir<l 15.03.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant drawn tl-c rlttention of this Court on the ar t,itration clause which rcirds thus: " 10. in case of any dispute arise between tlc partics, have to s( l tl,r amicable in thc event of any failu't to settle the disprrte or difference shall be referred to thc ilrbitrator arrd the rrrbitration proceedings will be conductt:cl according to thc rrovisions of thc Indial Arbitration aliri Concrliation A<:t, 1996. The arbitration award will be binrling upon the both thc parties and final. The place of arbit-ettion will be at Hvclt labad ar-rd proceedings will be in English. ''

4. Whe'n the dispute has arisen betwcen .tre parties, the appliczrnt got issued a legal notice dated 2t.10.2024 to the respondcnts for appointme nt of Arbitrator, but Lhe same could not fctch irnv rcsult.

5. Nobod v has cntered appearance for the reslltll-tdents despite servicc o notlce. tt appears that there exist clisputes between the partics u,hich need to be resolved throLlgh Arbitration proceclurr'. as per rhe dispute rcsolution clause

6. Earlicr . irr A.A. No. 99 of 2024, wlnerern the respondents are thc samc as those in lhe currcnt application, r LLis Court, by an order d: ter-l 11.07.2024, appointed Dr. Jrrs;lice Shameem Akhtcr, i forrner Judge of this Court, as the r;ole arbitrator to adjudicarc thc disputes between the parties.

7. There forr', in the instant case also, Dr. J rrstice Sharneem Akhter, ir frrrrner .Judge of this Court (resident- of FIat No.6F, Sixth ['loor. Mayfair Apartment, Bloc<'B, H.No.8-2- 269 l3/MFIF 6, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Sri Nagar Colony, Hyderabrrcl-35; Mobile No.8331998534), is acpointed as sole arbitrato. to zLdjudicate the dispute between tho parties. 3

8. The parties shall appear before the sole arbitrator on O5.O4.2O25 at 1 1:OO a.m. along with a copy of this order' Thereupon, the sole arbitrator shall proceed with the arbitral proceedings in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, the Arbitration Application is allowed No costs. As i sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any' stand closed.

6.Since,thisarbitrationapplicationisshowntobesimilarto theaforesaidcasearrdthereexistsanarbitrationclause'alive dispute between the parties, I deem it proper to allow this arbitration application on the same terns as in Arbitration Apflication No.19 of 2025 dated2l-O3'2025'

7. Therefore, Dr. Justice Shameem Akhter, a former Judge of this Court (resident of Flat No.6F, Sixth Floor, Mayfair Apartment' Block-B, H.No.8-2-269 l3lMrFlF-6, Road No'2, Banjara Hills' Sri Nagar Colony, Hyderabad 35; Mobile No'833 1998534) is appointed as sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties. The parties shall appear before the sole arbitrator on 8. 3O.O4.2O25 at 11:OO a'm' along with a copy of this order' Thereupon, the sole arbitrator sha1l proceed with the arbitral proceedings in accordance with law. 4

9. Accordingly, the Arbitration Application is allowed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaleous petitions, p,:nding if any, stand clo sed. To, //TRUE COPY" SD,. M. \ \ \t VIJAVFBHASKER l-otut RectsrRnn SECTION OFFICER ffi ": '8i',.',:i;i"'i:t"&lti::[:l^Jii"i:x,"-i*i}s,'Jsff i1?;H:::f,:;ihfi ., a j i N a s a r N e a r v e n k areswa ra ffi i[r+:,fl trif I" ,T3[:tJ'3:[.:i:1ffi:"9,,r,,3,3",ry1_i:.,:i,:fl ",lliL",Ll),, 1 PamavvagartR3machander, i Pr.rvvaqari PradeeP t;ouo Llli': !::il;t i:':* l; tm" ;* e"";S: i .,*,;i** i i:s"s, ur;i #i #i "1;-;;ary,4i,; Ir11i .s,% a ns a n a s, a,e -H:+:]il J,"#:'; .*ll i:#'{** uor.o, ". i c" uo^ ;'o;;;iy;s," r 13 g sti pinr'v.l"g3-rr KaranGouo ?i:i""1-;,;- N;ar Pochan io. PrrrYY'g'n srrdhar GoL '" r!i"n6ln' st't" ^^.., q/o. H.No 3-54l2A Hanuman Templo Tellapur 502302' Telangana 11. Pamayyagarl '\run Gouo F ,, Bl'lurr *,, :,1T::: :"" *, X"* [ I""3-il; o] ii prrrvirgr, \,']leshalatl 14 pamayyasan N .hlitn Y:L';;" n' 15 Sri. Pamayyz'gari Vlshal ueuu r r ''" ' - - " i"trngrn"'s,rig . 16 Sri Pamayya(lari Narsrng t " !*i,,"i''i, 'i:ii ",1;liL'H";r1 lJ3li"., rerrapur' Sangareddv 17. Sri. Pamayyegarl rtdrrsrr \ ' ' 6irt,.l"r iir'r,t'n? st^ut9--rrn coud, resident of 9-3/1, Ilamachandrapuram' Tellapur' 18 Sri. Pamayvagarl Avrnz '" irng,';ooi Dlrrct Telangana state resident of I3il' Rarnachandrapuram' Tellapur' 19 Sri. Pamayvagari S!rer ; ?Tf"#til[i",]fl:lii"ffi;lus "*'n'' ]":?t:::.:''ll'*""T1[,]'t:':i''9'l:J? '" pu*Ltnrp Firm havins- its pri15:,'J ,lf:% ".1J.[Jfi.ii'. i]rffi;; too--o1a' r'tuns'n' -- T^r-^',. -^ Rao (Babu Goud). resident of 9-3/1 F amachandrapuram Tellapul' 9r:""Rr".'-u i.r", zo Telapur 502302rl,"'f::.'# s+:l;pur 'r,r" azo Beside Han "i5', ,[, JSr'J,?nl i3l5l.s e-3/1, Ramachand'apuram' *. t""

502302. ", " 2szt82lN1222t F4. Fourth t]ool; L"iX"l""n "i"i,noana stat,:. ;i,"i"i.d;;*.'e11+y".:f""'f,'iodn::|ffi i"::813'J,1"] 21 . One CC to liri' V Seethal 22.Two CD C)oPies V HIGH COURT DATED:1110412025 l t, ORDER ARBAPPL.No.48 of 2025 q C t) T4SEFI i 16- ) (. s APil z0r5 j Li,. ,J - ^t,t.'..\{-l::, ., .'.. - ..2, * ALLOWING THE ARBITRATION APPLICATION Ttro

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments