POOJA VENTURE Vs. SHIVAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are before this Court praying that an Arbitrator be appointed to resolve the disputes between the petitioners and the respondents as per Clause 20 of the Joint Development Agreement dated 12.06.2006 and Clause 3 of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.02.2009. The respondents on being served with the notice have appeared and filed their objection statement to the petition.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners is that the petitioners and the respondents herein had entered into a Joint Development Agreement dated 12.06.2006, whereunder the petitioners had agreed to develop the property belonging to the respondents. In that regard, though certain payments have been made by the petitioners to the respondents, the lands which were the subject matter of the said agreement came to be notified for acquisition. In that circumstance, the petitioners and the respondents thereafter entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 25.02.2009, whereby certain other requirements to satisfy the agreement were agreed therein.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondents while relying on the objection statement would further contend that the petition is opposed by the respondents, firstly on the ground that the arbitration clause cannot be considered as one agreed upon by the parties inasmuch as the same cannot be construed as a clause, whereby the parties have agreed to refer the matter to arbitration. Secondly, it is contended that the nature of the agreement itself is contrary to law and therefore such agreement in any event cannot be enforced.