MISC. Petition No. 359 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 359 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. V.K. LALCO PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1017/1018, DALAMAL TOWER 10TH FLOOR, NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI-400 021. ALSO AT: 221, VARSHA APARTMENTS C.V. RAMAN ROAD, RMV EXTENSION BENGALURU-560 080. REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MR. GIRIDHAR RAMAIAH (BY SRI. KASHYAP N. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DR. SREE REVATHY .S AGED MAJOR FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER HAVING HER PLACE OF WORK AT DR SREE’S AESTHETICS NO.221, UNIT I AND UNIT II GROUND FLOOR, VARSHA APARTMENTS SIR C.V. RAMAN ROAD RMV EXTENSION …PETITIONER
Legal Reasoning
Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 SADASHIVANAGAR BENGALURU-560 080. ALSO AT: NO.23 TIRUMANEHALLI MAIN ROAD YELAHANKA, OPPOSITE WISDOM MONFORT INT. SCHOOL JAKKUR, BENGALURU-560 064.
Legal Reasoning
2. MR. M.VIMAL AGED MAJOR FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER HAVING HER PLACE OF WORK AT DR. SREE’S AESTHETICS NO.221, UNIT I AND UNIT II GROUND FLOOR, VARSHA APARTMENTS SIR C V RAMAN ROAD, RMV EXTENSION SADASHIVANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 080. ALSO AT NO.565/1 5TH CROSS, NEAR BBMP OFFICE, HMT LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 073. …RESPONDENTS (R1 AND R2 SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DATED 14.03.2025) THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT HONBLE SRI. A.L. PUJAR (RETIRED DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KARNATAKA) OR ANY OTHER PERSON THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT, AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR, TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PARTIES FROM AND OUT OF CLAUSE 23 OF THE LEASE DEED DATED 22.07.2022 HEREIN ANNEXURE A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 ORAL ORDER This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 23 of the registered lease deed dated 22.07.2022 as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: The petitioner is the absolute owner of the schedule properties, he agreed to lease out the said properties in favour of the respondents for 5 years. After mutual deliberation and commercial negotiations, the petitioner and the respondents entered into a registered lease deed. Accordingly, they entered into a registered lease deed dated 22.07.2022. The respondents agreed to make timely payments along with rents, taxes other charges etc., in accordance with the terms of the registered lease deed dated 22.07.2022. Since, the inception of the lease period, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 the respondents have failed to regularly remit the monthly rentals within the stipulated time frame and have only made irregular and erratic part payments. The respondents have been unable to remit, the rental amount for several months. Despite breaching the terms of registered lease deed, the respondents continued to run their commercial operations at the schedule property till date, and have been making unjust enrichments at the cost and expenses of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, the petitioner issued a legal notice dated 12.04.2024 terminated the tenancy and called upon the respondents to quit and deliver the vacant possession of the schedule property within 7 days. Despite receiving the termination notice, the respondents failed to vacate the schedule property or clear the outstanding amounts. 3. Since, there exists a dispute between the parties arising out of the lease deed, the petitioner invoked clause 23 of the registered lease deed vide - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 Arbitration Notice dated 17.05.2024 and proposed the name of the learned Arbitrator Sri. A.L. Pujar (retired District Judge) to act as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The arbitration notice issued to respondent No.1 was returned unserved, with an endorsement ‘unclaimed’ on 27.05.2024, while the said arbitration notice was served on respondent No.2 on 24.05.2024. The respondents failed to issue a response to the arbitration notice. The petitioner has no other efficacious remedy, except filing the instant petition. 4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents. Perused the records. 5. The point, that arises for consideration is as follows: “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the sole Arbitrator in terms of clause 23 of the lease deed dated 22.07.2022 as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996” - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 6. There is no dispute that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the schedule property and the said property was let out to the respondents under a registered lease deed dated 22.07.2022 for 5 years and it was agreed that the respondents make timely payments of the rental amount along with other charges etc., in accordance with the terms of the registered lease deed dated 22.07.2024. The respondent failed to pay the rent regularly, and made irregular and erratic rent payments. 7. The petitioner issued a notice dated 12.04.2024, terminated the tenancy and called upon the respondents to quit and deliver the vacant possession of the schedule property. Despite, the termination of a tenancy the respondent continued in possession of the schedule property. There exists a dispute between the parties arising out of the registered lease deed dated 22.07.2022. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the differences - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 between the parties to the petition vide arbitration notice dated 17.05.2024, and proposed the name of the learned Arbitrator Sri. A.L. Pujar (retd. District Judge) as a Sole Arbitrator. The arbitration notice issued to respondent No.1, was returned unserved with the shara as ‘unclaimed’. The arbitration notice was duly served on respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 neither replied to the arbitration notice nor consented nor even agreed to the name proposed by the petitioner. 8. I have perused the registered lease deed executed between the parties. In the said lease deed there is an Arbitration clause at clause 23, which reads as follows: “If any differences or disputes arise by and between the parties either in the construction, execution or in relation to this Lease Deed or pertaining to the lease transaction or money payable in connection with this transaction or in respect of the Schedule Property, then the parties agree that the dispute/s shall be resolved through arbitration as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The arbitration shall be conducted by a sole arbitrator who shall be appointed by the Lessor. The place and venue of arbitration shall be - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 shall Bengaluru, Karnataka. The Arbitrator award/grant interest, costs of proceedings, legal fees/ costs, award costs including stamp charges, etc., to the successful party from the date of accrual of cause of action. The arbitral award shall be final and binding between the parties.” 9. Admittedly, there is an arbitration clause in the registered lease deed. A dispute has arisen between the parties to the petition. Hence, the dispute is to be resolved through an Arbitrator, in terms of clause 23 of the registered lease deed. In view of the above discussion, I answer the point for consideration in the affirmative. 10. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
Decision
ORDER (i) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. (ii) Learned A.L. Pujar (Retd. District Judge) is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute arisen between the petitioner and respondents as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:12210 CMP No. 359 of 2024 (iii) The Office is directed to forward the copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator, and the Arbitration and Conciliation Center, Bengaluru. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE BVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14