1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 102 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

M/S. LTG INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

REGISTERED O/AT: LTG TOWER

NO.3,4,5 & 6, III FLOOR

BDA OUTER RING ROAD

NEAR KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR ARCH

LAGGERE, BENGALURU - 560 058

REPESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR

MR.H.P.LAKSHMANA.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH.M.H, A/W

SRI. RAVINDRA PRASAD.B., ADVOCATES)

AND:

SRI. CHIKKAVEEREGOWDA

S/O LATE. L.C.DODDAMAYANNA

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

R/AT: NO.34, BOOREHALLI VILLAGE

GANAKALLU POST, BIDADI HOBLI

RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT - 562 109.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. VIJAY SHEKAR.M.N, ADVOCATE )

THIS C.M.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11(6) OF THE

ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996, PRAYING TO (A)

EXERCISE

POWERS

UNDER

SECTION

11(6)

OF

THE

ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 AND CONFIRM THE

NOMINATION OF SOLE ARBITRATOR MR.MURTHY DAYANAND

NAIK, ADVOCATE OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE APPOINT ANY

OTHER PERSON AS SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE

DISPUTE THAT HAVE BEEN ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER

AND THE RESPONDENT AND ETC.

THIS C.M.P. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

2

ORDER

The present petition under Section 11 of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has been filed by the

petitioner-M/s.

LTG

Infrastructure

Limited

against

respondent

-

Sri.

Chikkaveeregowda

seeking

an

appointment of an Arbitrator in pursuance of ultimate

Clause

of

the

Agreement

vide

Annexure-B

dated

21.07.2015.

2.

The ultimate Clause of the said Agreement,

which is an Arbitration clause reads as under:-

“In the event of there being any dispute

between the parties, the same shall be resolved

through

the

process

of

arbitration.

The

arbitration shall be held at Bangalore, by a sole

arbitrator to be appointed by mutual consent

and it shall be held in accordance with the

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. The parties

are entitled to seek specific performance of this

MOU. Further, the parties have right to liberty to

seek specific performance of contract to enforce

their rights.”

3

3.

It is submitted that the requisite notice of

request for reference to arbitration was given by the

petitioner to the respondent vide Annexure-E dated

12.02.2019. No reply has been sent by the respondents to

the said notice. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court by

way of this petition to appoint the Sole Arbitrator to resolve

their disputes.

4.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits

that the stamp duty paid is insufficient and payment of

stamp duty prior to production of document before this

Court in support of the claim is not permissible as held by

this Court in the following decisions:-

i. Garware Wall Ropes Ltd., vs. Coastal Marine

Constructions & Engineering Ltd., - AIR 2019

SC 2053;

ii. Smt. Dyavamma Alias Sanna Mukkamma Vs.

Smt. Balamma and Others - ILR 2010 KAR

3280;

5.

Learned counsel also submits that a perusal of

the arbitration agreement contained in the ultimate Clause

4

of the agreement will indicate that the intention of the

parties was not to make arbitration the only mode of

dispute resolution and that the parties intended that the

petitioner could seek specific performance before the Civil

Court by filing a suit. In this context, reliance is placed on

the following decisions:-

(i) Wellington Associates vs. Kirit Mehta - AIR

2000 SC 1379;

(ii) Dilip Bafna Vs. K.S.Vasudeva - ILR 2007

KAR 3158;

(iii) Nitesh Urban Development Pvt. Ltd., vs.

Brigadier Peter Anthony Lopes & Others -

2019(3) KCCR SN 154.

6.

A perusal of the Agreement at Annexure-B

dated 21.07.2015 will indicate that prior to filing of this

petition, petitioner has obtained a certificate dated

15.02.2019 from the authorities certifying that the petitioner

has paid the deficit stamp duty and penalty pa