M/S SPAN EDUTECH VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED v. MR RAKSHITH KUMAR S

(BY SRI. HIRAN KRISHNASWAMY., ADVOCATE) AND:

#1. MR RAKSHITH KUMAR S S/O C. SOMASHEKAR, AGED 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT 32/3, NEXT TO K C DC., SOMASANDRA PALYA, HSR LAYOUT POST, Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:5217 CMP No. 438 of 2025 HC-KAR BANGALORE - 560 102. EMAIL [email protected]. AADHAR NO 3696 2582 2669

#2. MR. S KIRAN KUMAR, S/O C. SOMASHEKAR, RESIDING AT 32/3, NEXT TO K C DC., SOMASANDRA PALYA, HSR LAYOUT POST, BANGALORE 560 102 EMAIL [email protected] AADHAR NO 6522 1014 7778. …RESPONDENTS [V/O DATED 7/11/2025 H V RAMACHANDRA REDDY & LIKITH R REDDY, ADVOCATES FOR R1 & R2 (VK NOT FILED)] THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996., PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR WITH REFERENCE TO THE TERMS OF CLAUSE 16 OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT DATED 22.10.2022 (ANNEXURE-E) AND AS PER THE ARBITRATION NOTICE DATED 21.04.2025 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER (ANNEXURE - K). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:5217 CMP No. 438 of 2025 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

#1. The petitioner filed this Civil Miscellaneous Petition ORAL ORDER

#3. 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 16 of the lease deed dated

28.10.2022, vide Annexure-E. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: The petitioner and respondents have entered into a registered lease deed dated 28.10.2022 for a period of 30 years to construct and operate a school over the property described in the schedule of the lease deed. The respondents issued a legal notice unilaterally terminating the lease deed on 11.04.2025. The petitioner issued a reply notice invoking clause 16 of the lease deed, proposing the arbitration vide reply - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:5217 CMP No. 438 of 2025 HC-KAR dated 21.04.2025. The respondents issued a rejoinder dated 26.05.2025 to the reply notice and rejected the proposed arbitration initiated by the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

#4. Notice was issued to the respondents. Despite the service of notice, respondents remained

#6. unrepresented. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a memo along with the documents, wherein respondents have issued a notice on 07.01.2026 under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, admitting regarding the execution of a lease deed and also arbitration clause. He submits that the respondents have proposed the name of the Former High Court Judge. Hence, on these grounds, he submits that the petition may be allowed. - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:5217 CMP No. 438 of 2025 HC-KAR

#8. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel to the parties. The point that would arise for consideration is as follows: “Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute arose between the petitioner and respondents to the Arbitration in terms of clause 16 of the lease deed dated 28.10.2022, as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act and Rules?

#9. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and respondents have entered into a lease deed dated

28.10.2022. The respondents have terminated the lease deed by issuing a legal notice on 11.04.2025. The petitioner replied to the legal notice on

21.04.2025 and also invoked an arbitration clause 16 of the lease deed and proposed the name of an arbitrator, and the respondents issued a rejoinder for the reply notice on 26.05.2025. Further, the - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:5217 CMP No. 438 of 2025 HC-KAR respondents have issued a notice under Section 21 of the Act on 07.01.2026 proposing the name of the Arbitrator.

#10. The arbitral dispute arose between the parties to the petition and the dispute has to be resolved through an arbitrator. There is an arbitral clause 16 in the Annexure-E, which reads as follows:

#16. Dispute Resolution: If any dispute or difference arises between the parties hereto, in connection with the subject matter of this deed including interpretation of various clauses or words or language of this lease deed then the parties hereto shall refer the dispute to the arbitration of a sole arbitrator to be mutually appointed by the parties. The arbitration proceedings/meetings shall be held in Bangalore and all proceedings shall be conducted in English language and in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as the same may be amended from time to time or any statutory re-enactment thereof. - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:5217 CMP No. 438 of 2025 HC-KAR

#11. From the perusal of clause 16 of the lease deed, if any dispute arises between the parties in connection with the subject matter of the deed, the dispute shall be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner issued an arbitration notice by way of reply and further, the petitioner has produced a copy of arbitration notice issued by the respondents on 07.01.2026, wherein the respondents have issued a notice proposing the name of the arbitrator.

#12. In view of the notice issued by the respondents dated

07.01.2026, it is evident that a dispute arose between the petitioner and respondents and the said dispute has to be resolved by an arbitration. Thus, the petitioner has made out of ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator. Accordingly, I answer the point in the affirmative.

#13. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:5217 CMP No. 438 of 2025 HC-KAR ORDER i. The Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed. ii. Hon'ble Sri Justice Ajit J. Gunjal, Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka, nominated as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Rules. iii. Registry is directed to forward the copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator and the Director of Arbitration and Conciliation Center, Bengaluru. iv. Registry is directed to return the Certified copy/original documents produced by the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same. v. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS