IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 317 OF 2023

BETWEEN:

DR. PRAVEEN

S/O. M. A. MANJEGOWDA,

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

PARTNER,

ESA, INDIRANAGAR, NO.709, 4TH FLOOR,

7TH MAIN, 80 FEET ROAD,

INDIRANAGAR,

Digitally

BENGALURU-560 038.

signed by

SUNITHA K S

Location:

HIGH COURT …PETITIONER

OF

KARNATAKA (BY SRI. MANJUNATH, ADV. FOR

SRI. DALWAI VENKATESH., ADV.)

AND:

MR. RAKESH MANPAT

S/O. M. KRISHNA MURTHY,

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

NO. 336, TARAHUNASE VILLAGE, JALAHOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU-562 157.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. BHUVANENDRA RAJU P, ADV. AND SRI. P B RAJU, ADV.)

THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.11(5)

OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO (A) APPOINT THE LEARNED SOLE ARBITRATOR AS INDICATED IN CLAUSE 23 OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 05/07/2023 AT DOCUMENT NO.1 TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. (B) ORDER FOR SUCH FURTHER AND OTHER RELIEFS AS THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MAY REQUIRE AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

***

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section

11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’) to appoint the sole arbitrator as indicated in Clause 23 of the Partnership Deed dated 05.07.2019, to adjudicate the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent.

2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

The petitioner and the respondent entered into Partnership Deed dated 05.07.2019for having franchise of shooting training for athletes for sports. The Clause 23 provides for the disputes being resolved through an arbitration. The dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.815/2023 for the relief of perpetual injunction against the respondent, and another, which is pending adjudication. The petitioner invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in Com.A A No.121/2023 and the Trial Court granted an interim order dated 24.02.2023. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice dated 12.04.2023. The said notice was served on the respondent. Despite the service of notice, the respondent did not reply to the legal notice.

Hence, this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and also the learned counsel for the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner and the respondent have entered into a Partnership Deed on 05.07.2019 and the dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent. The dispute has to be resolved through an arbitration. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.815/2023, and also filed an application under Section 9 of the Act of 1996 seeking an interim measure. The Commercial Court granted an interim order vide order dated 24.02.2023. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a legal notice dated 12.04.2023. The respondent did not reply to the said legal notice. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that, there is no arbitral dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondent. Hence, the question of nominating the arbitrator does not arise. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

7. The point, that would arise for consideration is as follows:

“Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the dispute to the arbitrator in terms of clause No.23 of the Partnership Deed dated 05.07.2019 as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?”

8. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and respondent have entered into a partnership deed dated 05.07.2019. The disput