IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO. 152 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

M/S KMV PROJECTS LTD., NO. 9-3-948/949 LEVEL-4 SOLITAIRE PLAZA BESIDE IMAGE HOSPITAL AMEERPET HYDERABAD-500073 REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT SRI. TARANATH …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA S V, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ZULFIKIR KUMAR SHAFI., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S AND:

Location:

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 1. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY (BDA)

REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK (WEST) BENGALURU - 560 020.

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MARKET DIVISION BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK (WEST) BENGALURU - 560 020.

3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MARKET SUB-DIVISION INFRASTRUCTURE DIVISION-4 (MARKETS)

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK (WEST) BENGALURU - 560 020.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHASHANK PATEL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. AJAY KUMAR M., ADVOCATE)

THIS CMP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO APPOINT JUSTICE K.N.KESHAVA NARAYANA, FORMER JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA OR ANY OTHER RETIRED HIGH COURT JUDGE, AS A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 23.03.2018 IN THE ABOVE MATTER IN PURSUANCE OF CLAUSE NO.24 OF GENERAL CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT AND R/W CLAUSE NO.4 OF SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS NECESSARY UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND 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. The petitioner filed this petition under Section 11(6)

of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’), to appoint a Sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties to the petition in terms of arbitration clause contained in the agreement at Annexure-A dated 23.03.2018 inclusive of the General conditions of contract (Clause No.24) and the Special conditions of the contract (Clause No.4) as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules.

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

3. The petitioner is a reputed company and Class-I Contractor, engaged in the business of construction throughout India. The respondents invited bids for “Construction of Multi Purpose Commercial Complex at Santhe Maidan, K.R. Puram, Bangalore”. The petitioner became the successful bidder and further, the petitioner and respondent No.2 entered into the contract agreement dated 23.03.2018 for execution of the subject work. Further, the respondents failed to handover the encumbrance free site to the petitioner. In the meanwhile, the respondents directed to demolish the old existing building and sheds at the site. The petitioner was unable to demolish, and clear the entire site due to protests from the occupants. The petitioner submitted the running bills for the execution of certain works, which are executed as per the directions of the respondents. The respondents did not give any heed to the request made by the petitioner in resolving the issues. It resulted in loss, and damages to the petitioner. The petitioner issued a legal notice dated 10.12.2024 invoking the arbitration clause. Although the respondents received the legal notice, they did not concur in appointing the arbitrator. Hence, this petition.

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

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.