Telangana High Court
ARBAPPL/38/2025 of Dharavath Sunitha Vs The Managing Director on 12 March 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO: 38 OF 2025 Beween: Dharavath Sunitha, D/o. Mr. Ramulu, aged about 30 years, Occ. Housewife, R!/o.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO: 38 OF 2025
Beween:
Dharavath Sunitha, D/o. Mr. Ramulu, aged about 30 years, Occ. Housewife, R!/o.
H.No.134, SRT Jawahar Nagar, Ashok Nagar Cross Road, Hyderabad-20, Presently residing at Flat No.102, YHR Avenue, Near Raghunadha Model High School, Chaitanyapuri Main Road, Hyderabad - 500060.
...APPLICANT
AND
The Managing Director, M/s. Provident Housing Limited, No.'130/1 , Ulsoor Road, Bangalore - 560042, Karnataka State, Email. infogpuravankara.com.
...RESPONDENT
Arbitration Application under Section 11 (5) & (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 r/w Scheme for appointment of Arbitrators praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint a Sole Arbitrator U/ S. 11 (5) & (6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, read with para 3 (i) (c) of Scheme of Appointment of Arbitrators, 1996, as framed by Hon'ble High Court for the State of Telangana and under clause 20 of the Agreement for Sale-cum-Construction daled 25.O2.2O18, for adjudicating the dispute between the applicant and the respondent herein.
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr. Sudhakara Rao Ambati Counsel forthe Respondent: Ms. Purnima Singh The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH CoURT FOR THE STATE OF T.x- LANGANA
AT ITYDERABAI)
THE HONOURABLE SRT JUSTICE P. SAIVI liOSTry Arbitration Application No.38 of 2O? i Date of order : 12.o3.2O26
BETWEEN:
Smt. Dharavath Sunitha, D/o. Sri Ramulu
Applican t
And
The Managing Director
Responden t
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The instant Arbitration Application has been hl,: I by the applicanr under Sub-Sections (5) and (6) of Section 1 1 of t - : Arbitration an<i Conciliation Act, 1996 read with paragraph No.(3)(1)(< of the Scheme for appointment of Arbitrators, 1996 praying the Courr to appoint a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between t l- : applicant and respondent arising out of the Agreement for sak ctrm-constructio| dated 25.O2.2O18 entered into by the parties.
2. Heard Mr. Sudhakara Rao Ambati, learned r:ounsel for the applicant; and Ms. Purnima Singh, learned counsel for the respondent PaEe 2 ol 4
3. It is the case of applicant that she had entered into an Agreement lor Sale-cum-Construction dated 25.O2.2olg, whereunder the respondent offered to sell Schedule 'B' and 'c' ptoperties under the said agreement for a total sale consideration of Rs.40,49,5O0/_; pursuant to the said agreement, the application had paid initially an amount of Rs.26,00.00O/- to the respondent; however, the respondent_Company failed to discharge its contractual obligations under the said agreement and in turn requested the applicant to pay exorbitant amounts by way of penalties, though there was no necessit5z on the part of applicalt to pay pcralties; aggrieved, the applicant finally issued a legal notice dated 20 12.2023 to the respondent invoking Arbitration clause 20 of the ergreement which contained the provision that "any dispute or difference i:et*'een the parties with regard to this agreement and all connected and rr'],-rted matters whatsoever shall be discussed and settled amicably. In tlre event of an-y failure to resolve the disputes or differences amicably, a]l :;,-rch disputes or differences whatsoever shall be referred to Arbitration b,r . sole Arbitrator appointed by both parties in accordance with pro'isions of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 whose decision shail be hnal and binding on both parties"; however, the respondent gave et,asive reply to the applicant stating that since the agreement is already l l ! ) : I
terminated the question of referring the case to an Ar I itrator u'ould not arlse.
4. Aggrieved, the instant arbitration application ha; been frled by the applicant.
5. On 28.O2.2O2 5, notice was ordered to the 'r:spondent, and accordingly the respondent engaged a counsel to repre:;, rrt his case
6. Considering the factual matrix of the case and als ) the contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the applicant, thi.; Oourt is inclined to allow the Arbitration Application. Accordingly, tbi Court appoints Dr,.T.Raghuram, retired Principal District Judge, resi<t, nt of H.No. I 1 i 242 / I, Kishan Residency, 4th Floor, Shyamlal Buil< i rgs, Near Metro Pillar No.1365, Begumpet, Hyderabad as the sole Arbitrz tcr to resolve the inter se dispute between the parties.
7. Needless to state that both parties are at libertS' t r raise all claims and counter claims before the sole arbitrator who in tL rn shall conduct the arbitration proceedings in accordance with prov r ions of the Act The venue of arbitration shall be decided mutually by tl e parties subject to consultation and agreement of the learned Arbitrato . The fee payable PaBe 4 of 4 to the learned Arbitrator shall also be decided mutually by the parties in consultation and agreement with the learned Arbitrator. 8' Accordingly, the Arbitration Apprication stands alowed. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- B. SATYAVATHI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,
1. Dr. T. Raghuram, Retired District Judge, resident of H.No.1-'l 1-24211, Kishan Residency, 4th Floor, Shyamlal Buildings, Near Metro Pillar No.1365, Begumpet, Hyderabad. (By Special Messenger)(Along with a Copy of affidavit and material papers)
2. Ohe CC to SRl. Sudhakara Rao Ambati, Advocate [OPUC]
3. One CC to SRl. Purnima Singh Advocate TOPUCI
4. Two CD Copies DL/BA W
, HIGH COURT DATED: 1210312026
ORDER
11. +- :;'i-A iJ I j URR ?[ffi z ! * t- { r r'-.* _'."' \ ARBAPPL.No.38 of 2O25 ALLOWING THE ARBITRATION APPLICA TION k5 4slzl* .:i'*ii' r, .l'