The court's authority under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act restricts to determining the existence of an arbitration agreement, deferring substantive disputes to the arbitrator.

JUDGMENT :

HARISH TANDON, CJ.

1. An application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, 'the Act') filed by the petitioner is resisted by the opposite party primarily on the premise that the dispute raised in the notice invoking arbitration clause contained in the raising contact dated 18^th March, 2010 is beyond the purview of the arbitration agreement/arbitration clause contained therein.

2. Undeniably, the opposite party was granted mining lease for an area covering 262.27 acres of land situated in Tantra (Khata No.35), Rangua (Khata No.31) and Bandhal (Khata Nos.30 and 39) under Bonai Sub-Division of Sundargarh district in the State of Odisha on the basis of a mining lease deed dated 25^th January, 2002. Previous to entering into the said raising contract dated 18^th March, 2010, a similar contract was entered into between the opposite party and one M/s. Gayatri Mining Pvt. Limited on 14^th August, 2009 but that could not materialize and subsequently, the opposite party cancelled the said previous contract and approached the petitioner to operate and run the said mine on the terms and conditions embodied in the raising contract dated 18^th March, 2010. Indubitably, the said raising contract dated 18^th March, 2010 contains an arbitration agreement/clause in the event any disputes arise between the parties thereto in relation to or touching upon any of the terms and conditions embodied therein. Simultaneously, a tripartite agreement of the even date was also executed between the parties hereto and the said M/s. Gayatri Mining Private Limited for discharge of several statutory dues including the dues of the said M/s. Gayatri Mining Private Limited to the tune of Rs.14.00 crores. The validity of the said raising contract dated 18^th March, 2010 was agreed till the ultimate end of the mining lease which includes renewal and/or revival period or till the complete exhaustion of the detected mineral deposited in the schedule land, whichever is earlier.

3. In order to facilitate the smooth and continuous extraction of the minerals from the said mining lease which is commonly known as Tantra Bauxite Mines, a power of attorney was also executed in favour of an employee of the petitioner on 10^th May, 2010 wherein clause 36 thereof provides that the same is irrevocable and cannot be revoked at the sweet will of the opposite party. Apropos the same, several affidavits were also executed and affirmed by the opposite party so that the period of mining lease can be renewed and/or extended to be transferred in favour of the petitioner and it appears from the documents annexed and from the stand of the parties that considerable amount of money was also paid both to the statutory authorities and also to a 3^rd party in discharge of the obligation imposed upon the opposite party.

4. Amidst the aforesaid action and/or steps being taken, the Government of Odisha adopted a policy to enhance the tenure of lease to 50 years subject to fulfillment of the terms and conditions incorporated therein and to avail such opportunity, the petitioner engaged M/s. Earth and Environment Consultancy Services, a service provider to process the application for renewal and/or extension of lease and also to have clearances from various departments upon payment of the statutory dues.

5. It is a specific stand of the petitioner that despite having complied with all the statutory impositions including deposit of the statutory amount, the opp