IN *1'1«:r; mesa U()Ui{'i' or KARNMAKA AT * A'
DATED THIS THE 19*" DAY 0F*:£.2£.Ax§«*.(:%}:.&20\e§V%%{A M AL -.
m«;:«'o1.13{}z'1',a
Ulsaor Read, Bangaiofe --'"5 6{}
Reptd. fits i)i3'ectV(ir-]§.51:#.3'~§2:*.ni 'iii. Choksey. Petitienef.
% (By _& (:5;
';i:x3d":V _ '
V ' » . I31: Eaishmipaihgy? _Fsa1m,
.850
- ~ .. 2&2; I9' Cf:7$s;~ 2"" Biecic,
* 3"! Stage:
A I3.*u:ga_§ei'f::r W 568 085. Respondent
% —-. ( By_’Sri R. Nataraj, Adv.)
This Civéi Misc. Petitien is fiieé under Section 11(5) A
Arbitfation and Csnciliatien Ad, 19945 praying” __1;é’ appoint T
Mrfizstice (Reid) S.Vv2m.kata;’ama.n, a Retire.d__}udg:e afthijza.
Court of the Karnataka er 3 Retired District Judge, as –ti__:e– 5:216′ ii
arbitrator to adjudicaie: upon the dispute undar ‘£IieA~2ne1i*;0ra.r1du:}1 »c’i)ii*~’_ 7]’
understanding dated 39.12,2{}G5, £-ate, _
This Civil Misc. Petition comigggnfm Admissiegi tiiig. diiy;
‘file Court made the feilowing:;__ _ ~ . ._
i A
The petitioner’ i1as__iiled*ihis* Lliicier 31 01′ the
Arbitration and__. c}mci§’§};:;_m; 99¢” in :55}: ‘the Act’) for
appoinnneizji efa:3iii5ifhi§raite1j>io_iie§oi’vé a dispute, which has arisen
out ofihe meim-aifaaiczigziii pi’ dated 19.12.2005.
fietiiioner is a csmpany reg’stere:d uzidea’ the
The main objects 0:tӣhe petitiener company
V .aInongii””the::s.is {he business of cozzstsuction azzé éeveiopmeni of
kind coininerciai ceanplexes. The respondent is the
the ixmnovable property beisig agicuiturai lands bearing
T ~ii..:Sj;;1\ios.26i 1_, 2752, 28;? and 29 0f “falaghattapara village,
5
E
Rs.i,10,0{},0OGf« as damages. “fhe petitiener by its reply é””és» penéuzg
Thereibre, tha petitioner has £219/4:1 this.Apétifi§irn res0Iii§1<):2"é§f'the
dispute as pro*vide§' ' '
3. Afief senficé’ _(3a.if’A I1€3i:i},g-.~”:,4 the respondeszi has entered
_Vappeara;xs§§§ ih:0ugl1 Iiis. Advocaie. Hewever, the responfieai
I “has’.£10i .ii:lr.::i_ &$jgs afigegtimas.
A4:«._I ha_f§?e* the h=:a1°ne<:i Couzzsei fer the parties.
fiaaxwzed C0i3I1S€.¥ for tize respwzzmfieni denzies an the
h …,gJ}eg3ii9nS "made against the respondent in {he petition. However,
has no Cabjectizzn ibr appoimment afar: Arbitrator 1'3: aecorciance
%
\L%
V1
with Clause 11 of Armexure 'A', {be meinorandmn
understanditmg. In the circumstances, I pass the feiiowing; '
_Q2R!1E1_?
E, The petition is allowed. A _ A
II. I~Ion’ble Mr. Justice M.P.”( 3fiignapi§a,
this Court, No.14I9, “1<ave:i'f, 8"' §§:<:vK
Post, Bangalore ~» 56C' 065, is to reseive
the dispute between t¥1evpa11ies.""' " * — if V
III. Offiee is cegggz-.._¢'–this order to the
learned Arbitramr. It is in' ' 3:; the papers tiled
along the pe't§§;m to £0 enabie hhn to produce
the tfié 1550 costs.
Sd/’§..
‘Judge