D. M. Dharmadhikari, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Leave to appeal, as prayed for, is granted.
(2.) The appellant Hythro Power Corporation Limited has approached this Court aggrieved by rejection of its application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act" for short). The learned Judge of the Delhi High Court acting as designate or nominee of the Chief Justice, in exercise of his powers under Section 11 of the Act, by his order dated 7-12-2000 came to the conclusion that no agreement in writing having been executed by the parties with an arbitration clause, the prayer made by the appellant for seeking a reference of the disputes raised to arbitral Tribunal has to be rejected.
(3.) Aggrieved by refusal of the learned Judge of the Delhi High Court to make a reference to the arbitration, the appellant-Corporation filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Delhi. The Division Bench of the High Court by the impugned order dated 29-8-2001 came to the same conclusion that there exist no written arbitration agreement and hence the dispute between the parties cannot be referred for arbitration under Section 11 of the Act. The appellant-Corporation therefore has approached this Court by seeking leave under Article 136 of the Constitution.;