LOKESHWAR PRASAD ( 1 ) THE petitioner, named above, has filed the present petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) with the prayer to direct the respondents to file the Arbitration Agreement dated the 13th February, 1990 and to appoint an arbitrator directing him to enter upon reference and adjudicate all disputes/differences/ claims of the petitioner in terms of the said Agreement and, thereafter to make his award and file the same in the Court. 1. 2 It is alleged that the petitioner company is engaged inter-alia in the business of financing through schemes ofhire purchase and that the petitioner s sister concern known as Singer India Limited (heremafler referred to as sil ) is engaged inter-alia in the business of manufacturing and selling Sewing Machines under the brand names of singer . men-it etc. The petitioner company has been giving on hire purchase basis the Sewing Machines manufactured by its sister concern SIL to the authorised dealers appointed by SIL. It is further alleged that respondent No. 1 was appointed as dealer by SIL in the year 1979. On 13. 02. 90 the petitioner entered into an agreement ofhire purchase with respondent No. 1 at New Delhi whereunder the petitioner agreed to hire to respondent No. 1 company, Sewing Machines belonging to die petitioner on terms and conditions contained in the said Agreement (Exhibit P-3 ). As per the case of the petitioner, respondent No. 1 is a partnership concern and respondents 2 to 6 are the partners of respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 7 is the guarantor under the above said agreement (Exhibit P-3) who intep-aliahas guaranteed the fulfilment by respondents 1 to 6 of their obligations under the said Agreement. 1. 3 It is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner agreed to let on hire Sewing Machines, belonging to the petitioner company on terms and conditions contained in the said Agreement. The details of die Sewing Machines let out on hire by the petitioner to the respondents pursuant to the said agreement are also set out in annexure-A to the said Agreement. 1. 4 Under the terms of the said agreement, the respondents w ere liable to pay as and by way ofhire charges an initial amount ofrs 40. 213. 48 and the balance amount ofrs 4. 48. 1. 4 Under the terms of the said agreement, the respondents w ere liable to pay as and by way ofhire charges an initial amount ofrs 40. 213. 48 and the balance amount ofrs 4. 48. 278/- in twelve monthly instalments (the first eleven instalments being for a sum ofrs 37. 357/- each and the 12th and final instalment being for asum ofrs 37. 351/-only ). 1. 5 It is averred that towards the initial hire amount ofrs 40. 213. 48/- respondent No. 1 issued in favour of the petitioner a cheque bearingno. 969552 dated 27. 1. 90 drawn on rajkotnagrik Sehkari Bank Ltd. and for the 12 monthly instalments, the respondent No. 1 also issued 12 post dated cheques drawn on the above said Bank. The above mentioned cheques including the cheque for the initial hire amount, on presentation, were dishonoured. It is alleged that despite repeated requests made to the respondents, the respondents till the date of the filing of the petitionhave paid only aandum ofks 80. 005/- and an amount ofrs 4. 15,685. 48 is due and payable to the petitioner by the respondents by way of outstanding hire charges under the terms of the said Agreement and the respondents, as per the case of the petitioner, are jointly and severely liable to pay the said amount together with interest @ 24% per annum. 1. 6 The petitioner also addressed a registered notice dated tfie IStti May. 199 i calling upon the respondents to pay the aforesaid amount. The respondents were also called upon to deliver the Selling Machines forming the subject matter of the said Agreement. However, the respondent replied to the said notice by a letter dated the 15th June, 1991 through their Advocate Shri Sarojkumarn. Acharvainter-alia requesting for a copy of the said Agreement which the petitioner supplied without prejudice to its rights. 1. 7 The said Agreement contained an arbitration clause (Clause 14 ). Videletterdated3. 5. 91 thepetitioner requested Shri V. P. Shriyan. the sole arbitrator under the said agreement, to enter upon the reference and arbitrate the disputes and differences which had arisen between the parties. However, said Shri V. P. Shriyan, the named arbitrator, refused to act as an arbitrator on the ground of ill health. 1. Videletterdated3. 5. 91 thepetitioner requested Shri V. P. Shriyan. the sole arbitrator under the said agreement, to enter upon the reference and arbitrate the disputes and differences which had arisen between the parties. However, said Shri V. P. Shriyan, the named arbitrator, refused to act as an arbitrator on the ground of ill health. 1. 8 It is alleged that this Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present petition as the order for letting out on hire the Sewing Machines was placed at New Delhi and thereafter the said agreement was entered into belween the parties at New Delhi and all the amounts under the said agreement were due and pas able at the registered office of the petitioner company at new Delhi. It is alleged that the entire cause of action which-forms the subject matter of the present petition has arisen at New Delhi i. e. within the jurisdiction of tilis Court. It has been prayed that the respondents be directed to file the arbitration agreement dated 13. 2. 90 and an arbitrator be appointed directing him to enter upon the reference and adjudicate all disputes, differences and claims between tile parties under the said agreement. ( 2 ) NOTICE of the petition was issued to the respondents. Since direct service was not possible on the respondents, the respondents were served by publication of notice in the daily "the Indian Express ahmedabad Edition) dated the 23rd April, 1995. As the respondents did not care to appear despite the publication of the notice in the new spaper they were directed to be proceeded ex-parte in the present proceedings by the learned predecessor of this Court vide order dated 14. 11. 95. ( 3 ) THE petitioner has adduced the evidence in support of its case by means of affidavit and has filed the affidavit of Ms. Vimmy Trehan by way of evidence. Ms. Vimmy Trehan in her affidavit has fully supported the case of the petitioner and has proved the material documents including the hire purchase agreement dated the 13th February, 1990 (Exhibit P-3), the dis-honoured cheques collectively marked and exhibited as Exhibit P-4, copy of letter dated 18. 5. 91 (Exhibit P-5), letter dated 15. 6. 91 (Exhibitp-6), letter dated 28. 8. 91 (Exhibit P-9 ). 5. 91 (Exhibit P-5), letter dated 15. 6. 91 (Exhibitp-6), letter dated 28. 8. 91 (Exhibit P-9 ). From the ex parte evidence, adduced by the petitioner by means ofaffidaut which has gone on record unrebutted and unchallenged which I see no reason to dis-beljeve, the case of the petitioner, in my opinion stands amply proved. I, consequently direct that the arbitration agreement (Exhibit P-3) be filed in the Court and since Shri V. P. Shriyan, the named arbitrator, has refused to act as an arbitrator on the ground of ill health I appoint Mr. Justice (Retd.) S. C. Jain, a former Judge of this Court as sole arbitrator for decision. The arbitrator shall fix his own fees, to be initially paid by the petitioner. No order as to costs. The order is exparte. Dasti.