IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 494 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

1. MRS. SAMYUKTA KOPPULA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1211 S PRAIRIE AVE, UNIT No.3901, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60605, U.S.A.

2. MRS. VYJAYANTHI KODAGI MANKANI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT No.126, 17^TH AVENUE, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94121, U.S.A.

REPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF Digitally signed ATTORNEY HOLDER, by KI RAN MR. CHENNARAYA V. KODAGI, KUMAR R S/O. LATE K.L. VENUGOPAL, Location:

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, HIGH COURT OF RESIDING AT 5214, KARNATAKA CALIFORNIA STREET, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94118, U.S.A.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. M/S SATKRUTI EDUCATION MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT No.3, ULSOOR ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 042.

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. SURENDRA KUMAR BAJAJ.

2. MRS. JAYASHREE SIVAKUMAR W/O. SHIVAJI SIVAKUMAR, AGED 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.302, DISCOVERY RIDGEWAY S.W.

CALGARY ALBERTA T3H5S9, CANADA, ALSO AT NO.26/1, VANIVILAS ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU – 560 004.

3. SMT. JANAKI KODAGI, RESIDING AT NO.26/1, VANIVILAS ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU-560 004.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ARUN PRADESH E.,ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI. KASHYAP N NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR P’SD R2, SRI.VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(5) & (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT A SOLE ARBITRATOR IN TERMS OF SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, FOR THE RESOLUTION OF THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT, AND 2 AS PER CLAUSE 33 OF THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN THE LEASED DEED DATED 4.02.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE - A.

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 petition is filed under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’ for short) for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 33 of the lease deed dated 04.02.2022 vide Annexure-A.

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

2.1. The petitioners, respondent Nos.2 and 3 being the joint owners of the property in question, have executed a registered lease deed dated 04.02.2022 in favour of respondent No.1. The said lease deed was executed through power of attorney holder of the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3. The petitioners issued a revocation notice dated 08.02.2024 to the GPA holder, withdrawing their authority under the GPA. The petitioners issued a termination notice dated 16.03.2024 by invoking clause 21.2 of the lease deed. Respondent No.1 replied to the termination notice vide reply notice dated 06.05.2024 seeking for extension of time. The petitioners issued a legal notice dated 27.03.2025 confirming the expiry and warning against the illegal possession. Respondent No.1 replied to the said notice on 30.04.2025 claiming extension. On 13.05.2025, the petitioners returned the unauthorised payment made by respondent No.1 to the petitioners via demand draft. The petitioners issued a legal notice along with the demand draft on 19.05.2025. On 26.05.2025, respondent No.1 replied to the termination and returning of a demand draft. There is an arbitration clause in the registered lease deed. The petitioners, by invoking the arbitration clause, issued a notice dated 04.07.2025 under Section 21 of the Act to respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 did not reply to the arbitration notice. Hence, this petition.

3. Respondent No.1 filed a statement of objections contending that, the petitioners filed this petition by suppressing the material facts. It is also contended that, no arbitral dispute arose between the parties.

Accordingly, prays to dismiss the petition.

4. Respondent No.3 filed a statement of objections raising several grounds contending that, the petition filed by