Prakash Tatia, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a suit was filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation against the petitioner for recovery of Rs. 73,554/-. The defendant petitioner instead of applying for the reference to the arbitration, submitted written statement and in the written statement took a plea that the suit of the plaintiff is barred by law as there is an arbitration clause in the contract on the basis of which the plaintiff is seeking the relief in the suit. The trial Court framed issues No. 3 and 4 as the pleas were taken by the defendant in the written statement about the maintainability of the suit. The trial Court decided two issues against the petitioner-defendant on the ground that no application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as the Act of 1996) has been filed by the defendant and secondly the defendant has not produced the original copy of the arbitration agreement.

3. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the Honble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. M/s. Pinkcity Midway Petroleum, 2003 SOL Case N