- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) This revision petition is against, the order dated 16-4-2004 passed by the learned District Judge, Sri Ganganagar on the application filed by the defendants-respondents under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred as the Act of 1996'). The learned District Judge, Sri Ganganagar by the impugned order referred the matter to the arbitrator under Section 8 of the Act of 1996.
(3.) According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the Court below has committed serious error of law in entertaining the application under Section 8 of the Act of 1996 because of the fact that neither the original arbitration agreement nor its certified copy was produced by the defendants along with the application or even thereafter. And as per the mandatory provision of sub-section (2) of Section 8 of the Act of 1996, no application under Section 8 of the Act of 1996 can be entertained unless original copy of the arbitration agreement or its certified copy is produced along with the application. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Court is required to examine the validity of the arbitration clause and when the arbitration agreement was not produced then the Court had no occasion to apply its mind to the terms and conditions of the clause of arbitration and, therefore, the Court below had no occasion to examine whether the dispute can be referred to the arbitrator or not. It is also submitted that petitioner has also raised objection in writing before the trial Court that arbitration agreement was not filed by the defendants before the Court.;