Arun B. Saharya ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 39 of thearbitration Act, 1940, hereinafter referred to as the Act. arising out of an order dated 11th of July 1988 made by Shri P. D. Jarwal Sub Judge 1stclass, Delhi, refusing to file the arbitration agreement between the parties. ( 2 ) THE appellant entered into a contract with respondent No. 1 forthe work of "maintenance and Development of JJR Colony Hastsal SH,providing metalling and premixing carpet on dry brick edge flooring inblock A-2, B and C (Balance Work)". The contract contained an arbitrationclause No. 25 wherein the Engineer Member of the D. D. A. is designated asthe person to nominate an arbitrator in case of disputes between the particsarising out of the said contract. ( 3 ) DISPUTES arose between the parties. The appellant invoked thearbitration clause and sought appointment of an arbiration terms thereof. Respondent No. 1, did not act upon the request of the appellant. Consequently, the appellant moved a petition under Section 20 of the Act for anorder for filing of agreement and for a reference of disputes to arbitration. ( 4 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 has not disputed the validity or existence ofthe arbitration agreement nor that disputes have arisen between the parties,to which the agreement applies, and that the petitioner has invoked thearbitration clause. In opposition to the application, it was pleaded on behalfof respondent No. 1 that the appellant has not completed the work and thatthe claims made by him are not sustainable. ( 5 ) BY the impugned order, the learned trial court has refused to makea reference merely on the ground that the petitioner has not given thedetails" of the dispute. ( 6 ) I have perused the application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act filed by the appellant. In para 5 of the application, the appellanthas stated the disputes regarding refund of security diposit, balance paymentof the work executed, amounts payable on account of statutory increase,damages on account various breaches committed by the respondents, andinterest etc. The money value of the claim inrespect of each of these disputes,apart from a claim for cost of arbitration proceedings, has also been setout in this para. The money value of the claim inrespect of each of these disputes,apart from a claim for cost of arbitration proceedings, has also been setout in this para. ( 7 ) IT appears that the learned trial judge did not properly appreciatethe limited scope of the court s jurisdiction under Section 20 of the Actwhich led him to the erroneous conclusion that the petitioner has not given"details" of the disputes. Under Section 20, the Court has to see, inter alia,whether a difference has arisen to which the arbitration agreement appliesand whether there is any cause why a reference should not be made inaccordance with agreement. It is, therefore, sufficient for a person applyingunder this provision to specify the dispute for the limited purpose of satisfying the said requirement. The Court has not itself to adjudicate upon thedisputes. As such, there is no need for an applicant to plead his whole case,with all particulars and details, as required in an ordinary suit. ( 8 ) AS noticed earlier, the appellant has specified the disputes inpara 5 of the application. The arbitration agreement applies to thesedisputes. No cause has been shown why a reference of these disputes shouldnot be made in accordance with the agreement. The particulars of thedispute as pleaded in the application are enough for the present purpose. The appellant will, of course, be submitting a statement of claim beforethe arbitrator in which he will plead his case in detail in support of eachof the claim mentioned in the application. ( 9 ) THEREFORE, I set aside the impugned order dated 11th of April 1988and direct that the arbitration agreement between the parties be filed incourt and that an arbitrator be nominated by the Executive Member ofthe Delhi Development Authority in accordance with Clause 25 of the Agreement within K weeks from today, and I hereby make an order of reference ofdisputes mentioned in para 5 of the application under Section 20 of the Act. ( 10 ) THE appeal is, accordingly, allowed with costs.