An invoked partnership-deed arbitration clause warrants appointment of a sole arbitrator.

Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 and respondent No. 1 were partners in petitioner No. 1, a partnership firm engaged in mining and stone-crushing operations.

The firm was reconstituted by a deed dated 27 December 2021, which contained an arbitration clause at Clause 29.

Disputes arose under the deed, and the respondents issued a notice dated 10 November 2025 invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The petitioners then obtained interim relief under Section 9 from the IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District.

The court restrained specified interference with the partnership properties and bank transactions, subject to the stated time limits, and directed maintenance and disclosure of accounts.

The petitioners filed this Section 11 petition seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator; the respondents did not oppose the appointment but sought to keep all contentions open.

1. Whether the arbitration clause in the reconstitution deed and its invocation warranted appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Act.

2. Whether the parties’ claims and contentions should remain open for determination before the arbitrator.

Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 empowers the Court to appoint an arbitrator where the parties’ agreed appointment mechanism has not resulted in an appointment.

Section 21 concerns commencement of arbitral proceedings upon receipt of a request to refer the dispute to arbitration.

Clause 29 of the deed provides for disputes between partners concerning the deed, accounts, profits and losses, rights and liabilities, or dissolution to be referred to arbitration, with proceedings to be held at Bengaluru.

The Court cited no precedent.

The Court found that Clause 29 provided for arbitration of disputes arising between the parties and that the arbitration clause had been invoked by notice under Section 21.

Given the clause’s existence and the parties’ position on appointment, the Court concluded that a sole arbitrator should be appointed.

It left the parties’ claims and contentions open for consideration in the arbitration.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.A. Patil, Former Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, was appointed sole arbitrator, to conduct the arbitration at the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International), Bengaluru, under that Centre’s rules.

All claims and contentions were left open; the Registry was directed to communicate the order and return original documents after retaining photocopies.

The parties were directed to appear before the Centre’s Director on 20 November 2026 at 11:30 a.m.