Next Education India Pvt Ltd v. Gokilambal International School

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH

Judgment date: 2026-04-17

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-17. Next Education India Pvt Ltd v. Gokilambal International School. Read the judgment and case...

Judgment text

134781 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO: 210 OF 2025 Between: Next Education lndia Pvt Ltd, No. 8-2-2691N21 1-6, 1st Floor, East Wing, Sri Nilaya Cyber Spazio, Beside Annapurna Studios, Road No. 2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad 500034. Rep by its Director Mr. Daljit Singh Bajwa. ... Applicant AND Gokilambal lntemational School, NH 45C, Kuzhavadayan, Annaikarai, Udayarpalayam, Ariyalur, Tamil Nadu-61 2902. ... Respondent Arbitration Application under Section 11 (5) & (6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with para 3(1[c) of the Scheme for Appointment of Arbitrators, 2006 as framed by this Hon'ble Court and under Clause 11. 10 of the Master License Agreement dated 07. 04.

2017 praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint a Sole Arbitrator for the purpose of adjudicating the disputes between the Applicant and the Respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P RUTHVIK Counsel for the Respondent: -- The Court made the following: ORDER IN TIIE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'I}LE THE CHIEF JUS TICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH ARB TION APPLI CATION No. 21 of 2025 DATED: 17. 04. 2026 Between: Next Education India Pvt. , Ltd. Rep. , by its Director, Mr. Daljit Singh Bajwa, Hyderabad. Applicant AND Gokilambal [nternational School, Tamilnadu. Respondent ORDER: Heard Ivtr. P. Ruthvik, learned counsel for the applicant 2. By orcler dated 02. 04. 2026, this court proposed to appoint Sri B. Sathaiah, retired District Judge, as an independent Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The order dated 02. 04. 2026 is extracted hereunder for easy reference: "Lr:affi€d counsel Sri p. Ruthvik appears for the applicant.

UnCer the Master Licence Agreement - Teachnext dated 07. 04. 2017, the applicant company undertook to provide services to the respondent institulion. Byl, u disPute arose between the parties. As such, the applicant has invoked arbitration ':lause No. ll. l0 of the aforesaid agreement by service of notice dated 29'01'2025 proposing the name of an arbitratoi. th" respondent has failed to reply thereto deslite service of notice. Therefore, the appiicant has approached this Court. Despite valid service of notice, the respondent has neither appeared nor contested the praYer. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that earlier unilateral appointment of an arbitrator in respect of the same dispute was withdrawn in view oiin";uagrnent of the Apex Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Llmited ((zo2oi 20 SCC 760 :2019 SCC online SC l5l7). Thereafter, ih" pr. r"nt appticaiion has been preferred, as the respondent has failed to respond to tire notice dated 29. 01.

2025 invoking arbitration clause ll. l0 of the Master Licence Agreement - Teachnext dated 07. 04'2017 ' The dispute relates to payment of outstanding dues in lieu of products and services provided by the applicant to the respondent. The applicant had proposed the name of an arbiirator, but in the absence of reply, it had approached this court for appointment of an independent arbitrator. On hearing learned counsel for the applicant, it appears that the Master Licence Agreement - Teachnext entered between the parties contains an arbitration clause, wh]ch has been invoked by the applicant for adjudication of the dispute relating to payment of outstanding dues towards products and services provided to the reJpondent. Since the respondent has failed to respond to the notice invoking the arbitration clause and the ingredients for invocation of the jurisdiction of this court are satisfied as above, I piopose to appoint Sri B. Sathaiah, Retired District Judge (Resident of Flat No.

202, NMSK Sadan, Road No. 5, Sainagar, Nagole. Hy6"eratad; Mobile No. 9052620494), as arr independent arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. Needless to say, it would be. open^for the respondent to iake all grounds of law and facts, including the question of limitation, if any' before the learned arbitrator. The proposed arbitrator is requested to submit his consent and a declaration in terms of Section l2(l) read with Sihedule VI of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. proposed arbitrator. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the The matter be listed after three weeks with the response, if any, of the proposed arbitrator. " 3. The proposed Arbitrator has submitted his consent along with a declaration under Section 12(l) read with Schedute VI of the Arbitration and t conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the Act') by letter dated 15. 04. 2026' 4.

Leamed counsel for the applicant, therefore, submits that appointment of the proposed Arbitrator may be conf,rrmed. J 5. In that view of the matter, I hereby appoint Sri B. Sathaiah, Retired District Judge (Resident of Flat No. 202, NMSK Sadan, Road No. 5, Sainagar, Nagole, Hyd,:rabad; Mobile No. 90526 20494), to act as an independent Arbitrator in respect of the dispute between the parties. 6. Registr. z is directed to serve a xerox copy of the entire pleadings to the leamed Arbitrator. The leamed Arbitrator is requested to keep in mind the fee prescribed in Scheclule tV of the Act and the time limit prescribed under Section 29A of the Act. 7. The Artritration Application is, accordingly, disposed of' Miscell;lneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. K. SHYLESHI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFIGER To, 1. Sri B. Sathaiah, Retired District Judge ( of Flat No. 202, NMSK Sadan, ttoad No. S, Sainagar, Nagole, HYd erabad; tvlobile No.

9052620494) ( By Spet cial Messenger ( Along with a copy of affidavit and material ) papers) 2 bne CC':o Sri P Ruthvik, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD'3oPies &' ABK /BA / ,r HIGH COURT DATED: 17104121)26 i i, i l:-i= + L'r O 2 2 APR ORDER 202fi ARBAPPL. No. 21 rl ot 2025 * -_L DISPOSING OF TI{E ARBAPPL \ ? \

Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.