1. Rule. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners are the original plaintiffs who have filed suit for declaration that the respondent – defendant has made excess construction than permissible under law and that the defendant has no right to transfer the excess construction made by him. Further relief sought is to correct the Deed of Declaration dated 14-10-2008 as well as the subsequent sale deeds dated 26-4-2012. Other ancillary reliefs have also been sought in the suit. In that suit, the defendant filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (for short, the Act of 1996) praying that in view of Clause No.19 in the Deed of Declaration the disputes ought to be referred to an Arbitrator. By the impugned order the trial Court allowed that application and directed the parties to refer the disputes to the Arbitrator. Being aggrieved the plaintiffs have challenged the aforesaid order.

3. In the plaint it is the case of the plaintiffs that initially the father of the defendant was the owner of the suit property which was land at Nazul Sheet No.49/B. After his death the defendant became owner of the s