Jagdish Chandra ( 1 ) M/s Charat Singh and Co. . Kashmere Gate, Delhi has filed this petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 against the respondents. The petitioner is a registered partnership and is carrying on business of hire purchase of motor finance. The petition is signed and verified by Mahabir Singh one of the registered partners of the petitioner- firm. ( 2 ) AS per allegations in the petition hire purchase agreement dated 5. 4-1980 was executed by respondent No. 1 with the petitioner as hirer in respect of the vehicle in question detailed fully in para 3 of the petition and bearing registration No. CPH-7681. Respondents 2 and 3 executed this hire purchase agreement as guarantors for respondent No. 1. As per terms of the hire purchase agreement the total hire money was fixed at Rs. 1,81,250. 00 which was payable in 35 monthly instalments, and the first instalment was of Rs. 5130. 00 and the subsequent instalments of Rs. 5180. 00- each. ( 3 ) IT is alleged that out of the hire money the respondents are still in arrears and are liable to pay Rs. 25308. 00 as outstanding on account of balance bile money as well as compensation charges upto 31-12-1986 which the respondents failed to pay in spite of repeated demands including a notice dated 20-2-1987 by virtue of which the said hire purchase agreement was terminated and the respondents were called upon to hand over the custody of the vehicle in question since the disputes had arises between the parties and the respondents had failed to refer the same to the arbitrator named in the hire purchase agreement. According to the petitioner the following two disputes have arisen between the parties :- ( 4 ) THE respondents were proceeded against ex parte as they failed to appear in court despite service. ( 5 ) THE affidavit deposed to by Sh. Mahabir Singh one of the partners of the petitioner firm has been filed by the petitioner by way of ex parte and the perusal thereof shows that this affidavit supports the various averments made in the petition and the same need not be repeated as they have already been set out above. The affidavit talks of the hire purchase agreement dated 5-4-1980. The affidavit talks of the hire purchase agreement dated 5-4-1980. Its Clause VI is the arbitration clause according to which all disputes, differences, and/or claims, arising out of this hire purchase agreement, shall be settled by arbitration, in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940, or any statutory amendments thereof, and shall be referred to the sole arbitration of Shri Arun Kumar, Advocate, Delhi or in case of his death, refusal, neglect, inability, or incapability to act as an arbitrator, to the sole arbitration of Shri P. C. Mittal, Advocate, Delhi. The aforesaid disputes have arisen under this hire purchase agreement and so they are liable to be referred to arbitration for decision as per Cl. VI of the hire purchase agreement. The aforesaid affidavit in its para 15 says that defendant No. 3 Prithvi Pal Singh guarantor has been given up under the instructions of petitioner s counsel on 4-11-1987. So, this petition is liable to be dismissed as against respondent No. 3. ( 6 ) IN view of the above discussion the petition is allowed and it is directed that the arbitration agreement be filed in Court and the disputes and differences between the parties are referred for decision to the sole arbitration of the named arbitrator Shri Arun Kumar, Advocate, Delhi or in the case of his death, refusal, neglect, inability or incapability to act as an arbitrator to the sole arbitration of the alternative named arbitrator Shri P. C. Mittal, Advocate Delhi. The petition against respondent No. 3 is dismissed.