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. 196 OF 2023 BETWEEN:

M/S CONCORDE HOUSING CORORATION PRIVATE LIMITED R/O 46/A, 1ST MAIN, 3RD PHASE, J P NAGAR BENGALURU-560078 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR B S NESARA …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K V SATEESHCHANDRA., ADV.)

AND:

Digitally signed by KIRAN 1. MR NASIRUDDIN P BAGWAN KUMAR R S/O PAPULASAB Location:

HIGH COURT AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS OF R/O VIDYANAGAR KARNATAKA BEHIND MANICKBAGH AUTOMOBILES HUBLI-580031

2. MRS ANISA NASIRUDDIN BAGWAN D/O MR NASIRUDDIN P BAGWAN AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/O POST GANDHIWGWAD TALUK KHANAPUR DISTRICT BELGAUM-591112

3. MR RAHEES AHMED S/O MR NASIRUDDIN P BAGWAN AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/O POST, GANDIWGWAD TALUK KHANAPUR DISTRICT BELGAUM-591112

4. MR RAJA RAMEEZ BAGWAN S/O MR NASIRUDDIN P BAGWAN AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/O POST GANDIWGWAD TALUK KHANAPUR DISTRICT BELGAUM-591112 …RESPONDENTS (R1, R2, R3 AND R4 ARE SERVED)

THE CIVIL MISC. PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION

11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO NOMINATE AND APPOINT A SUITABLE SOLE ARBITRATOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLAUSE 9 OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, DATED 09.03.2020 AND 10.09.2020 TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE DISPUTES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS, VIDE ANENXURE-B AND C, 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

The petitioner filed this Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the Act of 1996’) for the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of clause 9 of the memorandum of understandings dated 09.03.2020 and 10.09.2020, vide Annexures ‘B and C’.

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

The petitioner and the respondents have entered into a memorandum of understanding dated 10.03.2020 and 10.09.2020 of the joint development agreement and general power of attorney. The dispute aroses between the parties to the petition in terms of the memorandum of understanding dated 10.09.2020. The petitioner issued a legal notice on 02.02.2022 calling upon the respondents to refund the deposits received under the memorandum of understanding and reimburse the expenses incidental thereto incurred by the petitioner within 10 days from the date of receipt of the legal notice. The respondent did not reply to the legal notice. There is an arbitration clause in the memorandum of understanding. The petitioner invoked an arbitration clause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Act on 13.02.2023 vide Annexure-F. The arbitration notice was served on the respondents. Despite service of notice, the respondents neither replied nor consented for the appointment of an arbitrator. Hence, this petition.

3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and also the learned counsel for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner executed the memorandum of understanding in favour of the respondents, and the respondents have committed a breach of terms and conditions of the memorandum of understanding. The petitioner issued a legal notice calling upon the respondents to refund the amounts. He submits that the respondents neither replied to the legal notice nor refunded the security deposit. There is an arbitration clause in the memorandum of understanding. He submits that the petitioner invoked an arbitration cause by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Act of 1996. He submits that the respondents have not replied to the arbitration notice. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no arbitral dispute arises between the petitioner and the respondents. Hence, the question of referring the