RAMAPRASADA RAO, J. :- The plaintiff is the appellant. He filed a suit (it is called a suit because of convenience) for a direction to the defendant to file the arbitration agreement contained in a contract entered into between himself and the defendant in connection with the supply of an insulated milk tanker made of stainless steel. He also prayed for a reference to an arbitrator other than the arbitrator named in the arbitration agreement, who was to be appointed by the court in this suit so as to decide the disputed matters as between the contracting parties. The suit arose this way. On 26-6-1964, the defendant invited tenders under Ex. A-1, for the supply of the milk tanker and such an invitation made it clear that the price was to be exclusive of sales tax. Under Ex. B-1, dated 29-7-1964, the plaintiff tendered and quoted a price of Rs. 35,000. This was accepted under Ex. B-2 dated 25-8-1964, and the plaintiff was directed to supply the tanker within 60 days from 24-10-1964 and he was also directed to pay a security deposit of Rs. 4,500. The plaintiff initially committed default in the matter of the supply of the tanker within the prescribed time. It appears, therefo