Hon’ble Suneet Kumar, J.—The instant application filed under Section 11(4)/(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act 1996), seeks appointment of an arbitrator in terms of clause 15 of the Agreement dated 30th August 2006.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and agreement with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties.

3. The point for determination is as follows:

(I) whether the agreement is a lease-deed or simpliciter business agreement ?

(ii) whether the arbitration agreement an unregistered instrument, is valid and enforceable ?

(iii) whether unregistered agreement, not duly stamped, is valid and enforceable ?

4. The applicant and opposite party are a company duly incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The opposite party is the owner of the disputed premises i.e. Shop No. 18 admeasuring 3577 sq. feet situated in Shipra Mall, Ghaziabad. The parties entered into a “Business Conducting Agreement” on 30 August 2006, whereby, the shop in dispute was leased to the applicant. As per terms of the agreement, the lease was for three years extendable for further period of three years and thereafter, extendable for another period of two years. The extension was subject to an increase of monthly rent @ 15% on expiry of each period as specified in the agreement. Therefore, in terms of the agreement, premises was leased for a period of eight years. The rent agreed to be paid by the applicant-company was @ 8.5% of the monthly sale of the restaurant, or a fixed sum, as specified, for different periods, in the agreement, whichever is higher.

5. It is not in dispute between the parties that the initial rent fixed at Rs.1,75,000/- on commencement of the agreement and the final rent paid at Rs.3,71,491/-, on expiry of eight years. The term of the agreement expired on 31 July 2014. In the leased premises, applicant is engaged in the business of running and managing a restaurant in the name and style KFC.

6. The dispute inter se parties arose with regard to the extension of the lease agreement after expiry of eight years. Till then, admittedly, there is no breach of any term or condition of the agreement. The opposite party on expiry of the agreement, called upon the applicant to vacate the premises to which the applicant responded that the company intends to continue occupying the premises, therefore, sought extension of the lease. The opposite party declined further extension, consequently, demanded that the premises be vacated, which was communicated by the opposite party vide communication dated 1 October 2014. It is alleged that thereafter, opposite party forcibly entered the premises, discontinued the electricity and water supply to coerce the applicant to vacate the premises. Consequently, the applicant had to close down the restaurant for customers. Aggrieved, applicant sought appointment of an arbitrator in terms of clause 15 of the agreement to adjudicate the losses suffered.

7. In the backdrop of the aforementioned facts, Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the applicant would submit:

(i) applicant suffered huge loss estimated at Rs.10 crore, for the illegal act and vandalism committed by the opposite party;

(ii) the premises was in the occupation of the opposite party for eight years, therefore, the opposite party had no right to forcibly break into the shop and demolish/destroy the interiors, furniture and other articles installed in the premises;

(iii) the dispute is arbitral and referable to clause 15 of the agreement;

(iv) the agreement not being a lease agreement, therefore, does not compulsorily require registration or stamping;

8. Sri Naveen Sinha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri S. Shekhar, learned counsel for the opposite party would submit:

(i) there is no subsistence of arbitral dispute between the parties;

(ii) agreement is unregistered and not duly stamped, therefore, unenforceable;

(iii) it is judicial function cast upon th