High Court of Karnataka Hears Petitions for Appointment of Arbitrator Under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Contractors and service providers seek independent arbitrator for claims against Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike under Clause 10 of Agreement dated 15-03-2007.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 61
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

Multiple civil miscellaneous petitions were filed by contractors and service providers before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioners sought appointment of an independent arbitrator to adjudicate claims against the Commissioner, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). The claims arose from agreements dated 15-03-2007, which contained an arbitration clause (Clause 10). Despite invocation of the arbitration clause by the petitioners, BBMP failed to appoint an arbitrator. Earlier writ petitions were mentioned in one of the connected cases, but no final order is recorded in the provided text. The petitions were heard together by Justice Aravind Kumar. The text does not include the court's decision or reasoning.

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010123642012_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (KAR) (03) 38

C.M.P. No. 14/2012 c/w C.M.P. Nos. 102/2014, 103/2014, 104/2014, 105/2014, 106/2014, 107/2014, 108/2014, 128/2014, 85/2014, 86/2014, 89/2014, 90/2014, 91/2014, 135/2014, 136/2014, 137/2014, 138/2014, 139/2014, 140/2014, 141/2014, 142/2014, 143/2014, 144/2014, 145/2014, 87/2014 & 88/2014

2015-03-17

Aravind Kumar

Uday Holla, V. Lakshminarayana, T. Mohandas Shetty, Vikram Balaji B.L., Prakash M Patil for Petitioners; S.N. Prashanth Chandra for Respondent

B.R. Ganesh and others (multiple petitioners)

The Commissioner, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil Miscellaneous Petitions under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of arbitrator

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought appointment of an independent arbitrator to decide their claims against the respondent

Filing Reason

Respondent failed to appoint arbitrator despite invocation of arbitration clause

Previous Decisions

W.P. Nos. 33663-33691/2009 and W.P. Nos. 4250-4278/2010 mentioned in C.M.P. 128/2014

Judgment Excerpts

praying ... that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint an independent arbitrator to decide the claims of the parties ... under clause 10 of the Agreement dated 15/03/2007

Procedural History

Petitioners filed Civil Miscellaneous Petitions under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before High Court of Karnataka. The petitions were connected and heard together.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: 11(5), 11(6)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Examines Whether Factory Land Without Dwelling Unit Counts Towards Urban Land Ceiling Under Section 4(9) of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The Court Considered Conflict Between Johnson and Meera Gupta on Computation of V...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows State Appeal in Land Acquisition Act Limitation Dispute. High Court Order Set Aside as Notice Under Section 12(2) Need Not Contain All Award Details and Limitation Under Section 18(2) Runs from Receipt of Notice.