M/S. Ramacivil India v. M/S. Finbird Technologies

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH CIVIL MISC. PETITION NO.09 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S. RAMACIVIL INDIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 HAVING THEIR REGISTERED OFFICE AT BP-22, WEST PATEL NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110008. CIN: U45309DL2017PTC322038 EMAIL: RAMACIVILINDIA@GMAIL.COM REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. GAURAV NAGPAL …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N. VENKATESH KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHINTAN CHINNAPPA M.,ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. FINBIRD TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 HAVING THEIR REGISTERED OFFICE AT T20, A BLOCK, PRABHAVATI HEAVENS APARTMENT, 3RD CROSS, 1ST MAIN, BTM STAGE 4, BENGALURU-560076 by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

ALSO AT: B-4, 4-4, KUDREMUKH COLONY, 2ND BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560034 CIN U74999KA2020PTC136548. EMAIL SAPNANIJHAWAN@HOTMAIL.COM …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. TEJAS S. R., ADVOCATE)

THIS CIVIL MISC. PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.11(5)(6) OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT., PRAYING TO DIRECT THE APPOINTMENT OF SOLE ARBITRATOR INTERMS OF CLAUSE XXV OF THE I-REC AGREEMENT DATED 16.04.2024, FOR ADJUDICATING THE DISPUTES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO THE I-REC AGREEMENT DATED 16.04.2024 IN PAGE 33 VIDE ANNEXURE B.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties.

¶2In this petition, the petitioner has sought for appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 25 of the I-REC Agreement dated 16.04.2024 for adjudicating the dispute that

has arisen between the parties as per 'Annexure-B' to the petition, in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

¶3The appointment of the Arbitrator was opposed by the learned counsel representing the respondent by stating that, the arbitration clause provides for the three member arbitrator for resolution of the dispute and also submitted that the nature of the dispute raised by the petitioner is not arbitral in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.R.Engineers and Contractors Private Limited Vs. Som Datt Builders Limited reported in (2009)7 SCC 696 and submitted that the petition requires to be dismissed.

¶4In this regard, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there is no impediment for appointing arbitrator for resolution of the dispute concerned.

¶5Insofar as the second limb of the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent is concerned, I am of the view that by looking into the exchange of e-mails by the parties which requires to be

considered by the learned Arbitrator in the Tribunal and taking into consideration the Clause at 25, providing for the resolution of dispute by the three Arbitrator seat, I am of the view that the Arbitrators be appointed for resolution of the dispute concerned.

¶6Hon'ble Smt.Justice Uma, former judge of this Court be appointed as an Umpire and the two Arbitrators Sri.S.R.Somashekhara and Sri.N.B.Kulkarni, the retired District Judges, have been appointed as remaining two Arbitrators for the resolution of dispute in terms of Clause 25 of the document produced under 'Annexure-B' to the petition.

¶7All claims and contentions of the parties are kept open to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶8A copy of this order be sent forthwith to the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre, Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru, for proceeding further in the matter.

¶9Registry is directed to return all original documents produced by any of the parties after obtaining Photostat copies of the same.

¶10Since the parties are represented through their learned counsel, in order to avoid further delay in the matter, the parties are directed to appear before the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre on 22.04.2026 at 11.00 a.m., without waiting for further notice in this regard.

¶11After the completion of the dictation, both the learned counsels submitted in chorus that, parties are willing for appointing Sole Arbitrator. Therefore, accepting the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, Smt.M.G. Uma, former Judge of this Court be appointed as Sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute in accordance with law. With these observations, CMP is disposed off. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE AP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29