VIPIN SANGHI, J.

( 1 ) THIS arbitration application has been filed by the petitioner under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) seeking appointment of an arbitrator to refer the petitioner's claim to arbitration.

( 2 ) IT is not in dispute that the parties were running a partnership business under the name and style of M/s. Kreative Ambience vide a partnership deed dated 30-10-97. This partnership deed contained an arbitration agreement in Clauses No. 16 and 17, whereunder disputes arising between the parties were mutually agreed to be referred to one arbitrator, agreeable to both the parties.

( 3 ) IT appears that disputes arose between the parties and the respondent initially issued a notice of dissolution on 27-03-2002 purporting to dissolve the partnership firm with effect from the said date. The respondent sought the settlement of accounts of the partnership firm and demanded payment of 50% share out of the proceeds and assets of the partnership firm. In para 12 of the notice, the respondent enlisted various machineries and equipments belonging to the partnership firm and desired that the value of the items be quantified and the proceeds shared equally between the partners.

( 4 ) IN response, the petitioner vide a communication dated 10-04-02, while disputing various allegations made against him by the respondent, agreed that the assets and the plant and machinery should be valued. He agreed that the partnership firm be dissolved w. e. f. 27-03-02. The petitioner also proposed mutual appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the disputes amicably at the earliest. The petitioner thereafter sent three communications dated 29-04-02, 04-05-02 and 08-05-02 reminding the respondent to respond to the request for arbitration and seeking her early response. The petitioner filed the present petition on 13-10-05.

( 5 ) THE respondent filed her objections/reply to the present petition. While it is not disputed that an arbitration agreement exists between the parties under Clauses 16 and 17 of the partnership deed dated 13-10-97, the only objection raised by the respondent is that the present petition is barred by limitation.

( 6 ) THE petitioner filed his reply to the objections/rejoinder and contended that the cause of action lastly arose 8. 12. 2002 which was the last communication issued by the petitioner. The petitioner has filed, inter alia, two communications dated 24-10-02 and 23-11-2002 sent by the respondent to the petitioner, and the response of the petitioner to these communications of 7. 11. 2002 and 8. 12. 2002. It is contended that since the parties were raising claims against each other which were being disputed by the other, demanding rendition of accounts from each other and also rendering accounts to each other, and this process was going on till November 2002, it cannot be said that the cause of action lastly arose in March/april 2002. It is submitted that the petitioner could invoke the jurisdiction of this court to appoint an arbitrator in terms of Section 11 of the Act within three years from the date on which the cause of action last arose, and if it is found that the cause of action lastly arose in December 2002, the present petition would be well within the period of limitation.

( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, in support of her submissions, has relied on (2006) 4 SCC 658 : 2006 (88) DRJ 1[sc] "hari Shankar singhania and others v. Gaur Hari Singhania and others" wherein the hon'ble Supreme Court held, in relation to an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (The 1940 Act), that period of limitation for filing such an application is three years, and the right to file such an application accrues on the date when disputes in fact arise between the parties. The court held that where the parties are in dialogue and are corresponding to negotiate the matter, the right to apply under Section 20 of the 1940 Act accrues when the dispute in fact arises betw