(1) This is a Petition under the Arbitration Act for the determination as to the validity of an Arbitration Agreement.

(2) The petitioner is a member of the Stock Exchange, Bombay, and was at all material times carrying on business as a certified Broker in shares and securities. In the years 1960 and 1961 the respondents employed the petitioners their brokers to effect transaction in shares and securities. The petitioner accordingly effected certain transactions. In the beginning there was no disputes between them, but later in May and June 1961 disputes arose between them. The petitioner made a claim against the respondents for payment of certain amounts but the respondents disputed their liability to pay the same on the ground that the petitioner had failed to carry out certain instructions of the respondents.

(3) The petitioner wanted the said disputes to be decided by arbitration as provided by the Rules. Bye-laws and Regulations of the Stock Exchange, Bombay. Accordingly the petitioner intimated to the Stock Exchange on the prescribed Forms that he had appointed one shah as his Arbitrator and called upon the respondents to appoint an Arbitrator on their own behalf. Thereafter the Stock Exchange informed the respondents about it and called upon them to appoint their own Arbitrator to act jointly with the Arbitrator appointed by the petitioner. The respondents by their letter in reply dated 5th December 1961 wrote to the Stock Exchange that there was no agreement for arbitration between the parties and that the petitioner did not therefore have any right to call upon the respondents to appoint their own Arbitrator. The petitioner thereupon filed this Petition mainly for a declaration that there exists a valid Arbitration Agreement between the parties in respect of the disputes.

(4) The respondents in the affidavits filed on their behalf in the matter of this Petition raised numerous contentions. It is, however, unnecessary to refer to them because Mr. Sanghvi their learned Counsel, stated at the outset of the hearing before me that the respondents admit that there exists a subsisting arbitration agreement between the parties in the terms contained in the form of the Contract Note annexed as Ex. A to the petition and as contained in the Rules and Bye-laws of the Stock Exchange Bombay in respect of all the transactions which the petitioner allege had taken place between the parties hereto and by reason whereof the petitioner claimed the sum of Rs. 3646875 mentioned in the Petition. He however stated that although the respondents admit the factum of the arbitration agreement as stated by him, the respondents wanted to contend and contend that that arbitration agreement is not a valid agreement in law. He stated that he wanted to raise the following two contentions:-

(1) The Bombay Stock Exchange is an illegal Association and that empowering the Governing Board or the President of the Exchange to appoint an Arbitrator on behalf of the defaulting party is not in accordance with the Arbitration Act, and

(2) There was no Arbitration Agreement as the Bye-laws of the Bombay Stock Exchange and had not been published in the Gazette of India or the Gazette of the former State of Bombay or the State of Maharashtra after they had been sanctioned by the Central Government in 1957 and hence the Bye-laws had not become effective having regard to the provisions of S. 9 of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act of 1956.

(5) These two contentions, although not taken by the respondent in the affidavits filed on their behalf, were foreshadowed when this petition reached hearing before another Judge of this Court and as the petitioner did not oppose the respondents urging those contentions and as those contentions concerned the legality of the Stock Exchange itself as also of its Rules, Bye-laws and Regulations, a notice was directed to be issued to the Stock Exchange. In consequence of that notice the Stock Exchange has appeared at the hea