[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri.M.Gangadhar Rao vs M/S.Vishwas Properties Developers on 22 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:3998-DB
MFA No. 7014 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7014 OF 2025 (AA)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.M.GANGADHAR RAO
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
S/O. M. MURALIDHAR RAO,
FLAT NO.102, VISHWAS RESIDENCY
NEAR AJJARKAD, UDUPI - 576101.
2. SMT. POORNIMA A. NAYAK.
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
W/O. SRI ARAVIND R. NAYAK,
GOPALAPURA, 1ST MAIN,
Digitally KALLIANAPUR, P. O. SANTHEKATTE,
signed by UDUPI 576105.
NIRMALA
DEVI REP. BY HER GPA HOLDER AND
Location: ALSO HER HUSBAND
HIGH MR. ARAVIND R. NAYAK, HINDU,
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
KARNATAKA S/O. SRI RAMARAYA NAYAK,
GOPALAPURA, 1ST MAIN,
KALLIANAPUR, P. O. SANTHEKATTE,
UDUPI 576105.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. MAHESH R UPPIN, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:3998-DB
MFA No. 7014 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
1. M/S.VISHWAS PROPERTIES DEVELOPERS
(A FIRM REGISTERED UNDER INDIAN
PARTNERSHIP ACT)
VIJAYA BUILDING,
OPP LOMBARD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL,
MISSION COMPOUND, UDUPI - 576101.
BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER.
2. SMT. JAYAPRADA S. SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
W/O SRIKANTH SHETTY,
K. VITTALA SHETTY COMPOUND,
GOPALAPURA, I CROSS,
SANTHEKATTE, KALLIANAPURA,
UDUPI 576105.
3. SRI G. SANJEEVA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
S/O SRI NARAYANA SHETTY,
DURGAPRASAD, SANTHEKATTE,
KALLIANAPURA, UDUPI - 576105
4. SRI. STEPHEN VIJAYA KUMAR KARKADA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
S/O SRI SHADRAK KARKADA,
VALENTINE, M. M. TEMPLE ROAD,
76 BADABABETTU, BAILOOR,
UDUPI-576101.
5. SMT. VASANTHI PUSHPALATHA AMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
W/O LATE AAARON PRAVEEN AMANNA,
6. SRI. ASHLEY NIHAL AMANNA
AGED ABOUT 39 YRS,
S/O LATE AAARON PRAVEEN AMANNA
7. SMT. AARON NEETHA AMANNA,
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:3998-DB
MFA No. 7014 of 2025
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
D/O LATE AAARON PRAVEEN AMANNA
No.5 TO 7 ARE THE L.R.S OF DECEASED
AARON PRAVEEN AMMANNA (PARTNER OF
RESP. 1 FIRM) AND RESIDENTS AT 'ROSEFELIX',
5-90A, 8TH CROSS, NEAR M. M. SCHOOL,
76, BADABABETTU, BAILOOR,
UDUPI-576101.
8. SRI. MOOSA KUNHI NAYARMOOLE,
S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE APPELLANTS,
AGE MAJOR,
HON'BLE SOLE ARBITRATOR,
RETIRED DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
NAYARMOOLE POST,
VITTAL, BANTWAL TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574243.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. SUSHMITHA SURESH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 TO R4
R5 TO R7 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED
NOTICE TO R8 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED 07.11.2025)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.37(1)(c) OF THE ARBITRATION
AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DT.
01.08.2025 PASSED IN A.P.NO.374/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE
I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DAKSHINA
KANNNADA, MANGALURU, DISMISSING AS BARRED BY
LIMITATION ACT FILED U/S.34 (3) OF THE ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT READ WITH SECTION 5 OF THE
LIMITATION ACT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:3998-DB
MFA No. 7014 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The appellants have filed the present appeal under Section
37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [A&C Act]
impugning an order dated 01.08.2025 [impugned order] passed in
A.P.No.374/2023. The said order was a common order passed in
A.P.Nos.384/2023 and 374/2023. The present appeal is confined
to the impugned order insofar as it relates to A.P.No.374/2023.
2. The appellants had filed the said petition under Section 34 of
the A&C Act on 05.10.2023 impugning an arbitral award dated
11.07.2023 [impugned award] before the learned District Court,
Udupi. The said petition/application to set aside the impugned
award was returned by the learned District Judge, Udupi on
13.10.2023 on the ground that the place of Arbitration fell within the
jurisdiction of the District Court at Mangaluru. The appellants had
thereafter filed the application in question (A.P.No.374/2023)
before the learned District Judge at Mangaluru. The same was
dismissed in terms of the impugned order on the ground that it was
barred by limitation.
NC: 2026:KHC:3998-DB
HC-KAR
3. Under Section 34(3) of the A&C Act, the time available for
filing an application to set aside an award is three months from the
date of receipt of the award. However, the Court can condone the
delay of not exceeding thirty days in terms of the proviso to Section
34(3) of the A&C Act.
4. In the present case, it is the appellants contention that there
was no delay since the period during which they were pursuing the
application before the learned District Judge at Udupi was required
to be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
5. Apparently, the learned District Court had not accepted the
same as the learned Court found that the explanation provided by
the appellants for proceeding before the Court at Udupi did not
appear to be bona fide. The Court observed that the appellants
had knowledge that the Courts at Mangaluru had jurisdiction,
however, had proceeded to file the application to set aside the
impugned award at Udupi to harass the respondents.
6. It is the appellants case that they had filed the application to
set aside the impugned award at Udupi as both the appellants as
well as the respondents were residing within the said jurisdiction.
NC: 2026:KHC:3998-DB
HC-KAR
7. Considering the aforesaid explanation, we are unable to
accept that the appellants have not established a sufficient cause
for a delay of fourteen days.
8. The appeal is allowed and the impugned order insofar as it
relates to A.P.No.374/2023 is set aside. The appellants application
for setting aside the impugned award is restored before the learned
District Court, Mangaluru. The parties shall appear before the said
Court on 10.02.2026 for further proceedings.
9. Pending IAs., if any, stand disposed of.
SD/-
(VIBHU BAKHRU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
SD/-
(C.M. POONACHA)
JUDGE
ND
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
