Proper notice and opportunity to be heard are essential in arbitration proceedings; failure to adhere to these principles constitutes a violation of natural justice, warranting annulment of the award.

JUDGMENT :

T.M.NADAF, J.

Unsuccessful petitioners, in petition filed under Section -34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (‘Act 1996’ for short), are before this Court calling in question the judgment and order dated 30.11.2021, passed by the Court of LXXXVIII Additional City Civil and Session Judge (Exclusive Commercial Court) (CCH-89), Bengaluru City COM.AS.No.193/2019, dismissing the petition filed, by them, seeking to set-aside the Arbitral Award dated 11.01.2018, in A.C.No.91/2017.

2. Facts of the case are as follows:

The undisputed facts are that an agreement dated 02.11.1998 was entered into between the appellants and respondent Nos.6 to 9 herein on one part, and respondent Nos.1 to 5 on the other part, in respect of the immovable property stated in Schedule-A and Schedule-B to the agreement. Whereupon the parties viz., the appellants and respondent Nos.6 to 9 being the co-owners of the property at Schedule-A agreed to sell 1.9859% of their undivided share, right, title and interest in favour of respondent Nos.1 to 5, for the purpose of construction of commercial office / shop bearing No.212 on the 2^nd Floor measuring a built-up area of 411 sq.ft. As per the agreement, the amount agreed for the property being Rs.1,67,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Sixty Seven Thousand Only), Rs.1,40,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Thousand Only) was required to be paid on or before signing of the agreement and the balance Rs.27,000/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Thousand Only) on or before the time of registration. It is further admitted fact that a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) has been paid by way of two cheques being No.601651 drawn on Bank of Maharashtra, dated 09.07.1997, for a sum of Rs.70,000/- and another being No.350977, drawn on Syndicate Bank, dated 10.07.1997, for a sum of Rs.30,000/-.

3. The disputed facts are that as per the appellants, respondent Nos.1 to 5 have failed to pay the amount as per the agreement, despite repeated reminders by the appellants and respondent Nos.6 to 9. As such, they have waived their rights under the agreement. However, as per respondent Nos.1 to 5 the appellants have not come forward to execute the sale deed despite several reminders, to receive the balance of consideration amount and to execute the registered sale deed.

4. It is the case of the respondent Nos.1 to 5, that the appellants qua respondent Nos. 6 to 9, subsequent to the agreement dated 02.11.1998 and payment of earnest amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) supra, in spite of several reminders, have not come forward to receive the balance of sale consideration amount and execute the sale deed, in terms of the agreement supra. The respondents No.1 to 5 issued a notice in 2015, calling upon appellants qua Respondent Nos. 6 to 9 to perform their part of performance by accepting the balance sale consideration and execute the sale deed or else to consent for referring the dispute to an Arbitrator as per the arbitration clause contained in the agreement supra for resolution. As there was no response from the appellant qua respondent Nos.6 to 9, they filed a petition in CMP No.78/2015, before this Court seeking to appoint an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties. Appellants who were served in t