Charanjit Talwar ( 1 ) THIS petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act filed by the Motor and General Finance Ltd. was registered be a suit. It is directed against Shri Raisuddin, respondent No. 1 and Shri Haji Nasirudd sin,respondent No. 2, both of Khatauli (U. P.) Respondent No. 2 was served in person but respondent No. 1 could not be served in the ordinary manner. Therefore, an order directing that he be served through substituted service was passed by the Joint Registrar on 15th May, 1986. In spite of service on that respondent by way of publication of notice in the stateman of 5th June, 1986, there was no appearance on his behalf before the joint Registrar. He has not put in appearance in the Court as well. Respondent No. 1 has also not put in appearance before the joint Registrar. By my order of 25th August, 1986, I, therefore, directed that the respondents be proceed ex parte. ( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner is that it, infer alia, carries on the business of hire purchase of motor vehicles in different parts of the "union Territory of India. " The petitioner gave on hire to respondent No. 1 a motor vehicle bearing registered No. HRO 1385 with Engine No. 692-DO1-7-07182, Chassis No. 344-073-7-07458 vide agreement dated 27th September, 1982. Respondent No. 2 guaranteed the due performance of the said agreement. Under the terms of that agreement respondent No. 1 had agreed to pay Rs. 1,87,500. 00in thirty-six monthly instalments in addition to compensation charges and incidental expenses. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has paid only a sum of Rs. l4000. 00 towards the hire charges. The agreement, it is averred, contains a clause under which all the disputes between the parties have to be referred to an arbitrator. The second copy of the said agreement has been filed by the petitioner along with an affidavit. Reliance of the petitioner is on clause 6 of agreement which provides that all disputes, differences and claims arising out of the said agreement shall be settled by arbitration. ( 3 ) IT is the case of the petitioner that the following three disputes which are mentioned in paragraph 8 of the petition are to be referred to an arbitrator: (I) "the amount of hire due and payable to the petitioner from the respondents. ( 3 ) IT is the case of the petitioner that the following three disputes which are mentioned in paragraph 8 of the petition are to be referred to an arbitrator: (I) "the amount of hire due and payable to the petitioner from the respondents. (ii) the payment towards compensation charges due to the late payment of hire money and other incidental charges. (iii) to determine extent of liability of respondent No. 2 being a guarantor". ( 4 ) I am satisfied that there is an arbitration agreement between the parties and that the disputes referred to in paragraph 8 of the petition and noticed by me above are referable to an arbitrator. ( 5 ) AS the second copy of the agreement in question containing the arbitration clause has been filed I direct that the disputes between the parties, as noticed above, be referred to the named Arbitrator, Shri Inderjit Gulhati, Advocate, within four weeks from to-day.