NIKHIL THARD Vs. HANUMAKKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this civil miscellaneous petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for resolution of the dispute which has arisen in relation to the Memorandum of Understanding at Annexure A dated 16.07.2012.

(2.) THE petitioner contends that he had entered into the aforesaid MOU with the respondents for the development of land in Sy. No. 77/3 (77/3A and 77/3B) measuring 2 acres 18 guntas situated at Nagawara Village, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore Urban District and construct residential apartments thereon. The built up area has to be divided between the petitioner and the respondents in the ratio of 58:42. The petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.1 crore as non -refundable deposit to the respondents. It is contended that the respondents have failed to perform their obligations under the aforesaid MOU. Therefore, the petitioner issued a notice as per Annexure -B dated 16.4.2013 calling upon the respondents to appoint an arbitrator for the resolution of the dispute. The respondents have failed to respond to the said notice.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner would contend that the power of attorney executed by the petitioner herein in favour of Miss. Bharathi M., authorizes her to engage or appoint any solicitor, counsel, advocate pleader or lawyer. It has also authorized Miss. Bharathi M., to sign vakalaths, affidavit, plaints, applications, petitions or documents before the Civil Courts, Criminal Courts, High Court of Karnataka and Supreme Court of India and all other Quasi Judicial Authorities, Tribunals, etc. Under the power of attorney, the petitioner has authorized Miss. Bharathi M. to file the above CMP before this Court. It is further argued that if this Court comes to a conclusion that there is deficit payment of stamp duty, the petitioner is ready to deposit duty and penalty in this Court.