IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 259 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

1. SRI SUBHASH MEHTA, S/O SRI. PREM DATTA, AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS, PRESENTELY R/AT PRAKRUTHI CLUB RESORT, PLOT NO.21 AND 22, HEGGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHLLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562 110.

2. SMT. USHA MOHAN, W/O SRI SUBHASH MEHTA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT PRAKRUTHI CLUB RESORT, PLOT NO.21 AND 22, HEGGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHLLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI ASHVINI PATIL, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SHWETHA AND:

RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH M/S BABA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., COURT OF KARNATAKA A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, REGISTERED OFFICE AT "PRAKRUTHI CLUB AND RESORT LAYOUT", PLOT NO. 12A, HEGGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHLLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. P. SASHIBHUSHAN.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI UMESH M N, ADVOCATE FOR R-1)

THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996., PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR IN TERM OF CLAUSE 19 OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED 17.07.2004 AT ANNEXURE - C ON THE DISPUTES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS AND THE RESPONDENT AND REFER THE DISPUTES FOR ARBITRATION BEFORE THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION CENTRE, BANGALORE (DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs;

a. "Appoint a sole arbitrator in term of clause 19 of the Development Agreement dated 17.07.2004 Annexure C to adjudicate on the disputes that have arisen between the Petitioners and the Respondent and refer the disputes for arbitration before the Arbitration & Conciliation Centre, Bangalore (Domestic & International).

b. Pass any orders/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."

2. Petitioner and Respondent had entered into a Development Agreement dated 17.07.2004, which is governed by an Arbitration Clause 19, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference;

19. In case of any dispute arising between the parties herein the same shall be referred to arbitration appointed with mutual consent and the decision/award of such arbitrator shall be binding upon the parties hereto.

3. The petitioner, contending that respondents were not providing water supply, had issued a notice on

30.07.2015, subsequently, on account of the same not having been complied with, the petitioner invoked the Arbitration Clause and issued a notice on

09.01.2025 appointing its nominee arbitrator.

4. The Respondent replies to the same on 20.01.2025 , denying all the contentions and further contending that the petitioner, having voluntarily filed O.S.No.620 of 2015 before the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli, having voluntarily chosen the Civil Court Forum, the petitioner cannot now invoke the Arbitration Clause. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner approached this Court seeking the appointment of an arbitrator.

5. Notice having been issued, the Respondent had entered an appearance.

6. Ms.Ashwini Patil., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that ;

6.1. Admittedly, the Joint Development Agreement is governed by an arbitration Clause. The suit which had been filed earlier was as regards the cause of action that had arose at that point of time as regards non supply of water, a fresh cause of action is now arising on account of non-supply of water, which she submits is required to be referred to arbitration and as such filing of the earlier suit was on a different cause of action then the present cause of action and this Court ought to appoint an arbitrator.

7. Sri.Umesh.