IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CIVIL MISC PETITION NO. 100012 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

M/S. B.S. BIRADAR

A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

“SHRI BHAGYAVANTI” PLOT NO. 125/126,

AISHWARYA NAGAR, BAGALKOTKAR LAYOUT,

ASHRAM ROAD, VIJAYAPUR,

REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI S.A. SANDUR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

HUBBALLI DHARWAD SMART CITY LIMITED,

CSS NO. 122/124, HDMC,

Digitally signed by SAMSKRUTIKA BHAVAN, 1^ST FLOOR,

VISHAL NINGAPPA

PATTIHAL NEW COTTON MARKET ROAD,

Location: High TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD 580025

Court of Karnataka,

Dharwad Bench, …RESPONDENT

Dharwad

(BY SRI APRAMEYA K. ADVOCATE)

THIS CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION

11 (5) AND (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT THE ARBITRATOR AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER CLAUSE 4 OF THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT UNDER BID DOCUMENT DATED 13.09.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT, IN THE

INTEREST OF JUSTICE

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. This petition is filed under Section 11(5) and

11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’ for short) seeking for the appointment of an arbitrator as contemplated under Clause 4 of the Special Conditions of Contract under the bid document dated 13-09-2019 at Annexure - A, to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

2. Heard Sri. S.A. Sondur for Sri K.L. Patil, learned counsels appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Aprameya K., learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:

The respondent floats a tender inviting bids for the purpose of construction work of ‘Smart Street Scape and Junction Improvements of Gokul Road including Operation and maintenance’ in Hubbali City. The petitioner participates in the said tender and emerges as the successful bidder, in pursuance of which a letter of acceptance is issued to the petitioner. Upon furnishing of the bank guarantee an agreement comes to be executed between the petitioner and the respondent and a work order comes to be issued in terms of the agreement. Later, certain disputes arise between the parties due to the delay in handing over the site for construction to the petitioner. The petitioner submits several representations to the respondent for handing over the site for commencement of the work and for payment of the costs incurred by the petitioner caused due to the delay, but they lead to no avail. Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents, the petitioner submits an application before the Deputy Commissioner for settlement of the dispute in terms of the arbitration clause in the Conditions of Contract in the bid document, but no settlement is reached between the parties. The petitioner then files CMP No. 100003 of 2025 before this Court for appointment of an arbitrator which is later withdrawn by the petitioner with liberty to file a fresh petition if necessary. Pursuant to the withdrawal, the petitioner issues a notice to the respondent seeking consent for appointment of an arbitrator as proposed by the petitioner in the notice, since the arbitration clause mandating appointment of a sole arbitrator unilaterally is null and void. The respondent issues a reply to the said notice denying their consent for appointment of the proposed arbitrator, insisting upon appointment of an arbitrator solely in terms of the arbitration clause in the Conditions of Contract provided in the bid document. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the arbitration clause in the Conditions of Contract is null and void since the sole arbitrator named in the clause is an interested party to the arbitral proceedings and therefore seeks for appointment of an independent arbitrator by this Court, acco