- (1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the petitioner under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as it was contended on behalf of the respondents that the agreement between the Appellants/petitioners and the respondents did not contain an arbitration clause. A plea was taken on behalf of the respondents herein under sub-section (2) of section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 that the Arbitral Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to determine the dispute between the petitioners and the respondents as the agreement between the petitioners and the respondents did not contain an arbitration clause.
(2.) THE learned arbitrator, who was appointed in pursuance of the directions of this Court in the petition filed by the petitioners herein, being Arbitration Petition No. 232 of 1998, with liberty given to the parties to raise all contentions, factual and legal available under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has, by his award dated 2nd July, 1999, held that the arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute raised by the claimants, i. e. , the Appellants/petitioners herein. It is this order which is challenged by the petitioners herein under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
(3.) IT is contended on behalf of the petitioners that although the petitioners have made a reference to the arbitration clause in the correspondence exchanged prior to the matter being referring to arbitration, the same was not disputed nor denied by the respondents. This correspondence was exchanged sometime in March, 1997 and April, 1997. It is the case of the petitioners that by the letter of 12th September, 1997, for the first time, it was contended on behalf of the respondents herein that there was no arbitration clause contained in the agreement.;