The court affirmed the validity of arbitration agreements even amidst disputes regarding payment obligations.

ORAL ORDER

This civil miscellaneous petition is filed under Section

11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996 seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute and difference between the parties in terms of memorandum of sale agreement dated 18.08.2015 evidenced at Annexure-A.

2. After receipt of notice, respondent has tendered appearance through learned counsel.

3. The petitioner asserts that he entered into an agreement of sale with the respondent for the purchase of a flat identified as Flat No.K2-1110, situated in Block No. 1, on the 11^th floor of the property known as 'Unishire Terezza'. According to the petitioner, the agreement was executed and registered on 18.08.2015 and 19.10.2015, respectively, and the total sale consideration agreed upon was Rs.1,09,29,774/-. The petitioner claims that the entire sale consideration has been paid to the respondent in compliance with the terms of the agreement. However, despite fulfilling his financial obligations under the contract, the petitioner alleges that the respondent has failed to perform his part of the agreement, specifically in delivering possession of the flat. Consequently, the petitioner issued a notice invoking the arbitration clause contained in the agreement, seeking resolution of the dispute through arbitration.

4. The respondent, opposing the petition, contends that the agreement of sale, prima facie, does not reflect the payment of the sale consideration. Relying on the legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case addressing the interplay between arbitration agreements under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996, and the Stamp Act, 1899, the respondent argues that the agreement is void and unenforceable. It is further contended that the absence of evidence regarding the payment of the sale consideration renders the agreement invalid, thereby disentitling the petitioner from invoking the arbitration clause.

5. After thorough review of the petition, annexures and supporting documents, this Court is satisfied that petitioner has met the procedural requirement outlined under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996. The objections raised by the respondent including non-payment of sale consideration which would render the document void requires to be examined by the Arbitrator.

6. In the light of the aforesaid clause of arbitration and contentions advanced by both the parties, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

ORDER (i) Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed appointing Sri. Ajit J.Gunjal, Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka as the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents and conduct proceeding at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic and International), Bengaluru according to the Rules governing the said Arbitration Centre; (ii) All contentions inter se parties are left open for adjudication in the arbitration proceedings;

(iii) Office is directed to communicate this order to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre and to Sri. Ajit J.Gunjal, Former Judge, High Court of Karnataka, as required under the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre Rules, 2012.