JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)--The present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter "the Act"] seeks appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of disputes relating to invoices issued by the Petitioner - Surya Processors Pvt. Ltd. [hereinafter "SPPL"] in the course of their dealings with Respondent - M/s. Shree Jai Gurudev Textile Agencies [hereinafter "SJGTA"].

2. SJGTA does not dispute the invoices, however, they contend that the instant petition is not maintainable as there is no arbitration agreement between the parties.

3. Ms. Tanishq Mehta, counsel for SJGTA argues that the arbitration agreement relied upon by SPPL does not fulfil the requirements of Section 7(4)(a) of the Act. A mere mention of `arbitration' in an invoice does not translate into existence of an arbitration agreement. The invoices are only a proof of service(s) rendered/good(s) supplied; it is not an agreement in itself. SJGTA is not a member of Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association (Regd.) [hereinafter "DHMA"] and therefore, they neither have confidence in its fairness, nor are its rules applicable to SJGTA. Reliance is placed on the judgmen