The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the arbitration agreement and the court's authority to appoint an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

1. Arb. P. No. 163 of 2013 is a petition under Section 11(5) read with Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties including their claims and the counter claims. O.M.P. No. 1047 of 2012 is under Section 9 of the Act for interim reliefs.

2. The background facts are that, according to the Petitioner, in August 2011, he began negotiating with the Respondent No.1, Sartaj Hotel Apartments and Villas Pvt. Ltd. through its Managing Director Mr. Raghbir Singh (Respondent No.2) for the purchase of land measuring 3.90 acres in Khasra Nos. 396, 377, part of 369, part of 370, part of 372 and part of 376 in Block-II in the revenue estate of village Malikpur Kohi @ Rangpuri, New Delhi including the motel constructed thereon under the name Celeberation Garden for a total sale consideration was Rs. 79 crores. According to the Petitioner, the parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 5th October 2011 containing the arbitration clause. It is stated that the Petitioner paid the Respondents a total sum of Rs.10 crores from time to time for which the Respondents executed receipts. The Petitioner alleges that the Respondent did not come forward to complete the formalities and after much persuasion towards the end of September 2012 assured that they would take the requisite steps for obtaining the No Objection Certificate, completion certificate and completion of other formalities. The Petitioner states that he was induced into issuing a post dated cheque dated 6th December 2012 in favour of the Respondent for a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Petitioner claims to be ready and willing to perform his part of the obligations under the MOU. He sent the legal notices on 25th October 2012 and 30th October 2012 invoking the arbitration clause.

3. The stand of the Respondents in the reply filed is that negotiations took place in respect of Block-II motel along with land admeasuring 3.75 acres. Respondent No.1. was under tremendous pressure from the bank from which it had availed credit facility and was facing proceedings under the Securitization And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Securities Act, 2002. It is in those circumstances that it agreed to sell the said property for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,15,00,00,000/- . Respondent No.1 does not deny that it received Rs. 1 crore from the Petitioner on 20th August 2011 for which a receipt-cum-letter of intent (LOI) was signed by the parties. It is stated that the parties agreed to enter into a MOU, at the time of signing of which 10% of the sale consideration was to be paid. It is alleged that the Petitioner, however, did not come forward to make the payment of 10% of the amount. It is, however, acknowledged that upto 17th September 2011, a sum of Rs. 3.50 crores had been received for which an acknowledgment was issued by the Respondent No.1. A copy of the said document has been enclosed with the reply. It is stated that the Petitioner got the said receipt signed which had blank space next to the khasra number, since at that time the khasra number could not be mentioned. It is further acknowledged that on 28th September 2012 the Petitioner paid Rs. 50 lakhs of which Rs. 35 lakhs was by cheque and Rs. 15 lakhs in cash. The Respondent signed a receipt for a total sum of Rs. 4 crores. This receipt again had a blank space next to the khasra number. It, however, contained the words Block-II.

4. It is stated that only a draft MOU was signed by the parties on 5th October 2011. Further a sum of Rs. 1 crore was paid by cheque on 12th October 2011 and Rs. 50 lakhs on 17th November 2011. Rs. 1.30 crores was paid on 9th December 2011out of which a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs was paid by cheque. A further sum of Rs. 45 lakhs was also paid. It is further submitted that on 9th January 2012 the Petitioner paid Rs. 65 lakhs out of which Rs. 30 lakhs in cash and Rs. 35