At the Section 11 reference stage, the court's jurisdiction is limited to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement and its invocation; issues of arbitrability or pre-conditions are left for the arbitral tribunal to rule under Section 16.

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (ORAL)

1. The present application has been filed under Section 11(6)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) praying for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes, which have arisen between the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was allotted a plot by the respondent-Greater Ludhiana Area Development Authority, Ludhiana vide Allotment Letter dated 28.06.2012 (Annexure P-1). The said allotment letter contains a valid arbitration clause i.e. Clause 8, which provides that all disputes or differences, which may arise in any manner touching or concerning this allotment, shall be referred to the Sole Arbitrator, Chief Administrator, Greater Ludhiana Area Development Authority, (GLADA) or any person appointed/nominated by him for that purpose. He further submitted that a unilateral appointment of the Sole Arbitrator at the discretion of the respondent is not permissible under the law in view of the amendment of the Act which was carried out in the year 2015 whereby Section 12(5) of the Act was added as well as the law settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Perkins Eastman Architects DPC Vs. HSCC (India) Ltd.”, 2020(20) SCC 760. Therefore, the present application has been filed for appointment of an independent Sole Arbitrator by this Court.

3. Learned counsel further submitted that when a dispute arose between the parties, the applicant invoked the aforesaid arbitration clause by issuing notice under Section 21 of the Act to the respondents vide Annexure P-8 dated 26.02.2026 and subsequently, it has come to the knowledge of the applicant that even the redemption has been ordered. The dispute between the parties relates to the allotment itself and thus falls within the scope of Clause 8 and accordingly, the applicant issued a notice invoking the arbitration clause vide Annexure P-8. However, no response was received from the respondent in this regard. In the notice invoking the arbitration clause, the applicant also proposed two names for appointment as an Arbitrator.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the present dispute is not arbitrable in view of the fact that Clause 8 itself provides that the Arbitrator can be appointed subject to compliance with the provisions of the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995, under which the allotment was made, and under that Act, once redemption of the plot has been ordered, the remedy lies by way of filing an appeal before the statutory authorities and hence, the dispute is not arbitrable in nature.

5. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6. The arbitration clause i.e. Clause 8, which is incorporated in the Allotment Letter (Annexure P-1) and has been invoked by the applicant, is reproduced as under:-

“8. DISPUTES

Subject to the provisions of the Act all the disputes and differences which may arise in any manner touching or concerning this allotment shall be referred to the Sole Arbitrator, Chief Administrator, Greater Ludhiana Area Development Authority (GLADA) or any person appointed/nominated by him in this behalf. The award of such Arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties. Arbitration shall be governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended from time to time.”

7. Learned counsel for the respondent has not disputed the allotment made to the applicant by way of the Allotment Letter (Annexure P-1) wh