Jagdish Chandra ( 1 ) THIS is a petition under S. 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 moved by the petitioner. The Motor and General Finance Limited, 17-B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi against the respondents. ( 2 ) THE petitioner is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act 1913 and having its registered office at 17-B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi and carries on the business of hire-purchase of motor vehicles. It is alleged that a hire purchase agreement (hereinafter referred to as the agreement) dated 8-8 1983 was executed by respondent No. 1 as hirer and respondents 2 and 3 as guarantors in regard to the motor vehicle in question bearing the following specifications : (A) Engine No. 692-DO 2-1-66071 (b) Chassis No. 344-052-1-58421 (c) Regd. No. TDH-4579 ( 3 ) UNDER the terms of the agreement respondent No. 1 agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,44,000 in 47 monthly hire instalments as follows :- " (A) First ten hire instalments of Rs. 6000 each. (b) Next ten hire instalments of Rs. 5600 each. (c) Next ten hire instalments of Rs. 5150 each. (d) Next seventeen hire instalments of Rs. 4500 each. ( 4 ) BESIDES the instalments of the hire money respondent No. 1 was to pay the compensation charges and incidental charges for defaults and delayed payments. The monthly hire was to be paid by the 6th of each English calendar month till the conclusion of the agreement. It was also provided in the agreement that in the event of respondent No. 1 making default in the payment of any monthly hire on the due date, respondent No. 1 was bound to restore possession of the vehicle in question to the petitioner at Delhi, in the same working order and condition in which it was hired out to him (fair wear and tear excepted ). It was further agreed in the agreement that the petitioner was to remain owner of the said vehicle and respondent No. 1 was to remain in possession thereof only as a trustee and bailee being the hirer for and on behalf of the petitioner. ( 5 ) IT is alleged that the respondents have neglected to pay the hire money and incidental charges as agreed between them and ultimately the petitioner resumed the possession of the vehicle and terminated the agreement by registered A. D. notice dated 4-1-1986. ( 5 ) IT is alleged that the respondents have neglected to pay the hire money and incidental charges as agreed between them and ultimately the petitioner resumed the possession of the vehicle and terminated the agreement by registered A. D. notice dated 4-1-1986. ( 6 ) IT is further alleged that the respondents have paid only a sum of Rs. 93,500 towards hire money and Rs. 5500 towards compensation charges leaving a sum of Rs. 58,550 towards over due hire and another sum of Rs. 9528 towards compensation charges for late payments and other incidental charges and that now a sum of Rs. 91500 is alleged to be due from the respondents under this agreement which the respondents have failed to pay in spite of the above mentioned A. D. notice dated 4-1-1986 and, thus, disputes have arisen between the parties. The disputes are detailed in para 8 of the petition. ( 7 ) THE respondents were ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte as they did not put up appearance in court despite service. ( 8 ) EX-PARTE evidence was ordered to be put in by way of affidavits. ( 9 ) ONLY one affidavit by way of ex-parte evidence has been filed by the petitioner and the same is deposed to by the petitioner s general attorney A K. Ahluwalia. The perusal of this affidavit shows that it fully supports the averments made in the petition and which have been set out above and which need not be repeated. ( 10 ) FROM the ex-parte evidence the case of the petitioner under S. 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 is made out. The agreement stands proved in this affidavit and the agreement shows that in its Clause VI (a) all disputes and differences, and/or claims arising out of this agreement shall be referred to the sole arbitration of Shri Inderjit Gulati, Advocate, Delhi. ( 11 ) CONSEQUENTLY, accepting this petition I direct that the arbitration agreement be filed in Court and all the disputes and differences between the parties are now referred for decision to the named sole arbitrator Shri Inderjit Gulati, Advocate, Delhi. This disposes of this petition. A copy of this order be sent to the Arbitrator. Even a dasti copy of the order be given to the petitioner for onward transmission to the Arbitrator.