ORDER :

These two Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are filed under the provisions of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by M/s Parth Infrapromotor LLP (Vendor Party No.2) and M/s Sattva Developers Private Limited, (Vendor Party No.3) respectively, seeking appointment of sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute in terms of clause 13.1 of the Agreement to Sell dated 02.11.2011, vide Annexure-F, entered into between the Parties (vendors and purchaser).

I. FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. It is the case of the petitioners that on 09.04.2011, the 1st respondent-M/s Maverick Property Investments Pvt. Ltd., entered into Memorandum of Understanding with M/s Salarpuria Hi-Rise Pvt. Ltd. which is a group of M/s Sattva Developers Pvt. Ltd. for the purpose of development of 104 acres 2 guntas of land in various survey numbers of Thubarahalli and Siddapura of Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. On 01.07.2011, the M/s Maverick Property Investments Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Salarpuria Hi-Rise Pvt. Ltd., entered into a supplementary Memorandum of Understanding, wherein, permission was given to the 1st respondent- M/s Maverick Property Investments Pvt. Ltd. to sell 35 acres of land to 2nd respondent –M/s TATA Consultancy Service Limited. Therefore, on 15.07.2011, M/s Sattva Developers Pvt. Ltd., for the purpose of setting up an IT and ITES SEZ project entered into Memorandum of Understanding with the M/s TATA Consultancy Service Limited/2nd respondent. On 01.07.2011, the 1st respondent entered into Memorandum of Understanding with M/s Parth Infrapromotor LLP to purchase 35 acres of land at consideration of Rs.4.5 crores per acre. M/s Parth Infrapromoter LLP entered into another Memorandum of Understanding dated 01.07.2011 with M/s Sattva Developers Pvt. Ltd., to purchase 35 acres of land for a sum of Rs.6.50 crores per acre.

3. It is further contended that following the aforesaid understanding, Agreement to Sell was executed between the parties on 02.11.2011. Under clause VIII(a) of the said agreement, the 1st respondent-Maverick agreed to secure sale deeds in respect of 27 acres 10 guntas of land out of 35 acres to enable conveyance thereof in favour of 2nd respondent for total consideration of Rs.195,38,25,000/-. The 1st respondent, after having claimed to have expertise in procurement of land and negotiating with land owners, has failed to procure the entire extent of land mentioned in the schedule property and sell the same to the 2nd respondent within the stipulated time as mentioned in the agreement, thereby, causing huge loss to the petitioner. Therefore, petitioners were compelled to issue legal notice dated 08.08.2019 against respondent Nos.1 and 2 under clause 13.1. On 04.09.2009, the 2nd respondent issued reply refusing to consent. The first respondent also issued untenable reply dated 07.09.2019 stating that the agreement to sell dated 02.11.2011 was no longer in existence having expired long ago and refused to meet the demands.

4. It is further contended that the 2nd respondent filed CMP No.320/2017 for appointment of an arbitrator, invoking clause 13.1 of the very agreement to sell dated 02.11.2011 and this Court, by the Order dated 23.11.2018, appointed a sole arbitrator and the arbitrator now proceeding with the matter in A.C.No.23/2019. Inspite of legal notice issued, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 have not come forward to comply the terms and conditions of the agreement. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court, for the relief sought for.

II. OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN CMP No.381/2019.

5. The respondent No.1 in CMP No.381/2019 filed objections, denied the averments and contended that on 01.07.2011, petitioner entered into Memorandum of Understanding with the 3rd respondent whereby, it is agreed to sell the land purchased from the 1st respondent to the 3rd respondent. The petitioner has suppressed the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the petitioner and respondents. As per the said Memorandum o