IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 553 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

1. M/S SCENIC BEAUTY HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED,

REGISTERED OFFICE AT 552, 7^TH MAIN ROAD, AGS LAYOUT

DOLLARS COLONY, RMV 2^ND STAGE

BENGALURU - 560 094

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY

RAJKUMAR S. …PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VYSHAK MANIKANTA S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MR. NAG KIRAN KEMPANOOL

Digitally signed

by SHWETHA S/O LATE SHAMBULINGAPPA K G

RAGHAVEN DRA

AGED MAJOR

Location: HIGH

COURT OF RESIDING AT NO. 385, 14^TH CROSS,

KARNATAKA

19^TH MAIN, 1^ST BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR

BENGALURU - 560 010

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. N. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.11(6) OF

ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT., PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT BE PLEASED TO a. APPOINT A FIT AND

PROPER PERSON AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE DISPUTE AND DIFFERENCES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION DATED 16.09.2021 EXECUTED BETWEEN BOTH THE AFORESAID PARTIES AT ANNEXURE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLAUSE 31 OF THE AGREEMENT.

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 fit and proper person as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences that have arisen between the Petitioner and the Respondent out of or in connection with the Agreement for Construction dated 16.09.2021 executed between both the aforesaid parties in accordance with clause 31 of the agreement at Annexure - A;

b) Order cost of or incident to this petition be borne by the Respondent;

c) Pass any such further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2. An agreement of construction dated 16.09.2021 was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent, the petitioner being required to provide architectural, structural and other design services including civil construction and construction of residential buildings to the respondent. Alleging that the services provided by the petitioner are not proper, the respondent had issued a notice on 29.07.2024 and has also filed a proceeding before the Consumer Court as regard to said deficiency of service. The petitioner in turn issued a notice on 26.08.2024 alleging that there are outstanding payments to be made by the respondent and as such invoked the arbitration clause. The nominated Arbitrator not having been accepted by the respondent, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid relief.

3. The execution of the construction agreement and the existence of the arbitral clause is not in dispute. The dispute raised by the respondent is that the respondent has filed a proceeding before the consumer forum and as such, a parallel proceedings cannot be maintained by the petitioner before an Arbitrator. In this regard reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the respondent on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 6500-6501/2023 in the case of SMT. M. HEMALATHA DEVI & ORS. Vs. B. UDAYASRI, more particularly at paragraphs No.5 and para 19 thereon, which are reproduced hereunder.

"5. The validity of the two orders impugned before us, therefore, have to be examined in light of sub- section 6A to Section 11 and Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1996. We will thus also be examining whether the dispute between the parties is arbitrable, and once a party has availed the remedy before a public forum under a special beneficial legislation, can it be compelled to go for arbitration?

In order to arrive at a conclusion, we will first have to refer to the nature of the dispute between the parties. The respondent before this Court is a home buyer who had entered into an Agreement for Sale with the present appellants on