RAJIV DHAM Vs. ANIL KUMAR GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioner challenging the interlocutory order dated 23/11/2016 whereby the Arbitrator has rejected the petitioner's application u/O.7 Rule 11 of the CPC.

(2.) In brief, the case of the petitioner is that the agreement dated 10/11/2010 was executed between the parties, thereafter some dispute had arisen, therefore, the matter was referred to the Arbitrator and before the Arbitrator, an application was filed by the petitioner under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code raising an objection that the arbitration agreement is executed on insufficient stamp, but the arbitrator had rejected the said application by the impugned order.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, it is noticed that Sec. 5 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 restricts the judicial intervention in the arbitration matter except as provided in Part I of the Act. Sec. 5 reads as under :-