ORDER : 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: “WHEREFORE, the petitioner respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an order of appointing the Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 to resolve the dispute between the Petitioner and Respondent as specified in the Joint Development agreement dated 11-07-2018 as per Clause No:18 by allowing this petition in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. The petitioner and the respondent had entered into an agreement of sale dated 11.07.2018 whereunder the petitioner had agreed to purchase the property scheduled to said agreement. Said agreement is governed by an arbitration clause in terms of Clause 18 thereof which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference: “18. In case of any dispute whatsoever between the parties to this agreement the same shall be referred to and settled by 1st arbitration of Mr.Guru Prasad, Advocate, Floor, Vijayashree Chambers, Near Karangalpady Market, Mangaluru-575003 and the decision of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding on both the parties.” 3. There being certain disputes between the parties, the petitioner had initially issued a notice on 25.03.2021 calling upon the respondent to comply with its obligation. Despite service thereof, no compliance was made, as such, the petitioner issued another notice dated 25.04.2022 invoking the arbitration clause and nominating Sri.Mosa Kunhi Nayarmoole, former District and Sessions Judge to resolve the dispute between the parties. The said notice also having been served, no response having been received, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for aforesaid relief. 4. Sri.K.Shashikanth Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there being arbitration clause invoked, the matter is required to be resolved by the Arbitrator, as such, notice may be ordered. 5. Having perused the arbitration clause which has been reproduced hereinabove, it is clear that parties had agreed for settlement of dispute by way of arbitration by Mr.Guruprasad, Advocate, having his office at 1st Floor, Vijayashree Chambers, Near Karangalpady Market, Mangaluru – 575 003. The same would indicate that the Arbitrator has been specifically chosen and identified and as such, there is a named arbitrator in the agreement. 6. Once there is a named arbitrator, it is the named arbitrator alone who could arbitrate the dispute between the parties. Neither of the parties could deviate from the said named arbitrator unless by written consent between themselves. 6. Once there is a named arbitrator, it is the named arbitrator alone who could arbitrate the dispute between the parties. Neither of the parties could deviate from the said named arbitrator unless by written consent between themselves. The petitioner by way of notice dated 25.04.2022 has deviated from the named arbitrator and sought to appoint one other person as an arbitrator which is not permissible. As such I am of the considered opinion that no notice could be issued in this matter. Faced with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to issue fresh notice and approach this Court, if required. 7. In the interest of justice, I am of the opinion that such liberty is required to be reserved. As such, I pass the following: ORDER i. The petition is dismissed. ii. Liberty is however reserved to the petitioner for initiation of fresh notice invoking arbitration clause by naming the person stated therein as an arbitrator and thereafter if need be, to approach this Court if the respondent does not respond favourably.