IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 361 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

M/S. LEGACY GLOBAL PROJECTS PVT. LTD.

A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 333, THIMMAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE, 560 052, (REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. SANJAY C.)

Digitally signed …PETITIONER by KIRAN KUMAR R (BY SRI. BADRI VISHAL., ADVOCATE)

Location: HIG H COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:

1. DR.B.SAROJA DEVI SRIHARSHA W/O MR. SRIHARSHA NO. 102, 11^TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU- 560 003 SINCE DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

1(A) MS. INDIRA RAMACHANDRA D/O. MS. BHUVANESHWARI, AGED MAJOR RESIDING AT NO. 102, 11^TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

1(B) MR. GAUTAM RAMACHANDRA D/O. MS. BHUVANESHWARI, AGED MAJOR RESIDING AT NO. 102, 11^TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

…RESPONDENTS [BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A &B)]

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN TERMS OF CLAUSE 34 OF THE JDA DATED 31.03.2011 AT ANNEXURE A AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

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. This petition is filed under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the Act’) seeking an appointment of the arbitrators for resolving the dispute between parties to the petition in terms of Clause 34 of the Joint Development Agreement dated 31.03.2011 vide Annexure-A as per the provisions of the Act.

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

3. The petitioner and the respondent executed a Joint Development Agreement and the general power of attorney for developing the schedule property on 31.03.2011. On 01.08.2013, the petitioner issued a notice seeking the taxes payable by the respondent on the saleable area share that was allotted to the respondent. The respondent replied to the said notice on 10.03.2014 denying her liability to make any payment towards service tax on having not received the possession of her share of flats. Thereafter, the respondent received the physical possession of the apartments as per the sharing agreement dated 30.11.2013. The petitioner again issued a notice dated 13.08.2018 to the respondent calling her to make the payments as per her obligations under specific heads as per the Joint Development Agreement. Again, the respondent issued a reply denying her liability. The petitioner issued a notice dated 28.04.2022 calling upon the respondent to pay the sum of Rs.2,07,12,612/- under several heads specified therein. Again the respondent issued a reply denying her liability regarding the service tax. On 05.09.2022 the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing the arbitration notice. In response, the respondent asked the petitioner to withdraw the arbitration notice aforesaid. The petitioner issued another arbitration notice dated 28.03.2024 invoking Clause 34 of the Joint Development Agreement dated

31.03.2011. The respondent issued a reply dated 29.05.2024 refusing to refer the dispute to the arbitration. Hence, this petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned counsel for the respondent.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the Agreement at Annexure-A having been entered into by the parties to the petition, the arbitral dispute arose and the petitioner has invoked the arbitration clause by issuing an arbitration notice under Section 21 of the Act. The agreement contains the arbitration clause, and the dispute has to be resolved through arbitration. Accordingly, on these grounds, prays to allow the petition.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for t