IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 461 OF 2024 BETWEEN:

C.S. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O PUTTAPPANADODDI VILLAGE, DABANUGUNDU, MUDAGERE POST, MALUR HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT – 562 160.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. PUTTARAJU A.C.,ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by KIRAN AND:

KUMAR R Location:

1. SRI KRISHNAPPA HIGH COURT OF S/O LATE PATEL MUNIYAPPA KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 2. SRI K CHANDRA S/O SRI KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

3. SRI C K KUMAR S/O SRI KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT CHOODASANDRA VILLAGE SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE – 560 099.

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.4, A & CS ROAD

1^ST CROSS, KOODLU VILLAGE MAIN ROAD JAYAPPA BADAVANE SINGASANDRA, BANGALORE – 560 068.

…RESPONDENTS (BY VIDE ORDER DATED 12.02.2026, SERVICE OF NOTICE TIO R1 TO R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

THIS CIVIL.MISC.PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION

11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1966, PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT PRAYS THAT (A) AN ARBITRATOR BE APPOINTED TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE THAT ROSE BY THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING DATED

19.01.2017 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

1. The petitioner has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the Act’) for the appointment of an arbitrator in terms of the unnumbered clause in the Memorandum of Understanding dated 19.01.2017 vide Annexure-A as per the Provisions of the Act.

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

3. The petitioner was the absolute owner of the land bearing Survey No.25/4 measuring 27 guntas and 5 other properties situated at Dhabanugunda-Malur, Channapatna Taluk.

4. It was agreed between the petitioner and the respondents that respondent Nos.1 to 3 would purchase 27 guntas of the said property along with 5 other properties at the rate of ₹2,75,000/- per gunta and entered into a Sale Agreement on 30.12.2016. Prior to the execution of the sale deed, the part of the said property i.e., 13 guntas out of 27 guntas was notified for acquisition for the purpose of widening of the national highway between Bangalore and Mysore by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, National Highway Authority of India. The petitioner and respondent Nos.1 to 3 entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 19.01.2017. On 08.12.2017, in respect of 13 guntas of land acquired, the National Highway Authority of India passed an award, and respondent Nos.1 to 3 are trying to receive the entire award amount without giving the petitioner's share of amount as agreed under Memorandum of Understanding dated

19.01.2017.

5. There is an arbitration clause in Memorandum of Understanding dated 19.01.2017 and the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Act on 18.01.2024.

6. The respondents replied to the arbitration notice on

26.02.2024, vide Annexure ‘C’. The respondents did not agree for the appointment of an arbitrator on the ground that there is no arbitral dispute between the petitioner and the respondents. Hence, a cause of action arose for the petitioner to file a petition.

Accordingly, prays to allow the petition.

7. Although, the Court notice was issued to the respondents, despite service of notice, the respondents remained unrepresented.

8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the records.

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

“Whether the petitioner has made out a ground to refer the arbitral dispute between the parties to the petition to the arbitrator in terms of unnumbered clause in the Memorandum of Understanding dated 19.01.2017 as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules?”

10. It is an undisputed fact that th