ASTHA CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. L G RAMAKRISHNAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is aggrieved by the award dated 12.05.2013, passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, Bengaluru, whereby the learned Tribunal has rejected the appellant's claim, has allowed the counter-claim of the respondent, and has directed the appellant to pay Rs.3,77,336/- to the respondent. Also aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 26.03.2016, passed by the VI Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCCH-11), whereby the learned Judge has rejected the application filed by the appellant, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1196 ("the Act", for short), the petitioner has approached this Court.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondent No.1, Mr. L. G. Ramakrishnaiah was the owner of property No.142, situated at Rajarajeshwari Nagara Sabha admeasuring 31,725 Sq.ft., located in Sy.No.39/5 of Srigandadakaval village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. He was also the owner of property bearing Sy.No.38(P), 39P and 40-P, located in the Rajaji Nagar Housing Co-operative Society Limited area, situated in Srigandadakaval village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. The appellant and the respondent entered into a joint development agreement ("JDA", for short) for construction of a residential Apartment Complex on the said properties. In compliance of the JDA, on 16.05.2005, the respondent executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of the appellant. Simultaneously, the respondent granted the possession of the properties to the appellant. Further, according to the JDA, it was the respondent's duty to get the General Power of Attorney, and the JDA registered. Furthermore, it was his duty to deposit the original title deed documents with the appellant. However, the respondent failed to do so.

(3.) Yet, on the other hand, in compliance of the JDA, the appellant not only paid the betterment charges to the Rajarajeshwari City Municipal Council, but also paid the required fees to the BWSSB and other statutory authorities. The appellant also got the sanctioned plan approved and started the construction of the residential apartment complex. So far, the appellant has completed the construction of the third floor of the complex.