SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 239766

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
MR. ARINDAM MUKHERJEE – Appellant
Versus
M/S PEARL COMMUNITY ONE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. – Respondent
CMP 323/2024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 323 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

MR. ARINDAM MUKHERJEE

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

S/O ARUN BIKASH MUKHERJEE,

R/AT G-1,

EXPRESS RESIDENCY,

BASAPPA ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR,

BENGALURU- 560 042

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRATIK PANY., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. M/S PEARL COMMUNITY ONE

DEVELOPERS PVT LTD.,

COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER

THE COMPANIES ACT 1956,

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

Digitally signed OLD NO.33, NEW NO.8/1,

by SHWETHA HAUDIN ROAD,

RAGHAVEN DRA

BENGALURU-560042

Location: HIGH

REPRESENTED BY ITS

COURT OF

MANAGING DIRECTOR.

KARNATAKA

2. MR. CHRISLYN CARDOZA

ALIAS MAURIS ANTON CHRISLYN CARDOSA

MANAGING DIRECTOR OF

RESPONDENT NO.1,

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

S/O BRUNO CARDOZA,

R/AT NO.6/2, HAYES ROAD,

RICHMOND TOWN, MUSEUM ROAD,

BENGALURU- 560 025

3. MR. VIVEK JAIRAJ EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF RESPONDENT NO.1, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O NAKKADI PULAMBIL JAIRAJ, R/AT NO.305, SRI RAM WHITE HOUSE APARTMENTS, 15TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN, R T NAGAR, BENGALURU- 560 032

4. SMT.R SHAKUNTALA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, W/O SRI PUTTAIAH AND D/O N M RAMANNA, R/AT NO.93, DEVI MANDIR, KAMAKSHIPALYA, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 079 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SRINIVASA M., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;

SRI. SIDDHARTH SUMAN FOR R4;

REP BY GPA HOLDER SUHASINI CHETHAN V/O DTD 16/12/24 R3 IS DELETED FROM ARRAY OF PARTIES)

THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11 (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, READ WITH ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2015. PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR AS PER CLAUSE 18.3 OF THE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT DATED 04.03.2016 (ANNEXURE B) ENABLING RESPONDENTS TO COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION AND EXECUTE A SALE DEED OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND PASS SUCH OTHER DIRECTIONS OR ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND NECESSARY IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

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 relief:

"WHEREFORE Petitioner respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint a Sole Arbitrator as per clause 18.3 of the Construction Agreement dated 04.03.2016 (Annexure-B) enabling Respondents to complete construction and execute a Sale Deed of the Schedule Property in favour of the Petitioner and pass such other directions or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and necessary in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity."

2. The petitioner had entered into an agreement of sale with respondent No.1/developer and respondent No.4/owner of the property. Respondent No.4 being represented by the developer as a general power of attorney holder, the said agreement is governed by an arbitration clause in terms of clause 15.3, which is reproduced hereunder for easy of reference:

"In the event of breach of the terms of this Agreement to sell or in the event of any differences or disputes arising between the parties in regard to this Agreement or any matter relating thereto, the same shall be referred to a sole Arbitrator to be appointed by the parties in mutual consultation or by court of law and his award shall be final and binding on the parties hereto and Arbitration shall be as per the Provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in force. The Arbitration shall be conducted in English Language and the place of Arbitration shall be in Bangalore."

3. The petitioner had issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, "the Act") invoking the arbitration clause on 07.03.2023, the said notice having been served on the respondents, respondent No.4 replied to the same, contending that the agreement was entered into by the developer, the landowner has no knowledge of the said proceedings and as suc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top