Judgment- This revision, preferred under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the order dated 08-11-2004 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rudrapur (Udham Singh Nagar) in civil suit No. 03 of 2004. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, a civil suit No. 03 of 2004 was instituted by respondent No.1, Uttaranchal Volleyball Association, through its Secretary, Sri O.K. Singh for declaration and injunction against the revisionists (defendant Nos. 1 and 3 and other defendants). In said suit it was pleaded that plaintiff (respondent No.1) is a Society, registered under Societies Registration Act, which selects the Volleyball players for representing the State for national and international events. Defendant No.1 (present revisionist No.1) and defendant No.5 (respondent No. 4) organize various events of Volleyball and recognize the various Volleyball Associations. Plaintiff / respondent No.1 is attached with the defendant No.1 (revisionist), and defendant No.5 (respondent No. 4) has also given its recognition to it. It is alleged by the plaintiff - respondent No.1 in his plaint that no confidence motion was moved on 22-09-2002 against the then President, defendant No.3, Avdhesh Chaudhary, for his activities against the plaintiff organization and new President was elected in his place. However, the defendant No.1 (revisionist) is still recognizing the defendant No.3, Avdhesh Chaudhary as President of the plaintiff organization. Hence, suit for declaration and injunction that the Executive elected on 22-092002 should be recognized and defendant No.1 or defendant No.3 should not interfere in the working of the plaintiff organization. 3. It appears that on 06-02-2004, the defendant No.1 moved an application in the aforesaid suit praying that plaintiff and the concerned parties should be directed to invoke Arbitration Clause and submit their dispute to the Volleyball Federation of India (defendant No.1) on the ground that there is Arbitration Clause contained in the Constitution and Bye-laws applicable to the parties. Learned trial court after hearing the parties, rejected the request on 0811-2004. Hence, this revision. 4. I heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, reads as under: "8. Learned trial court after hearing the parties, rejected the request on 0811-2004. Hence, this revision. 4. I heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, reads as under: "8. Power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement.- (1) A judicial authority before which an action is brought in a matter which is the subject of an arbitration agreement shall, if a party so applies not later than when submitting his first statement on the substance of the dispute, refer the parties to arbitration. (2) The application referred to in sub-section(1) shall not be entertained unless it is accompanied by the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy thereof. (3) Notwithstanding that an application has been made under subsection (1) and that the issue is pending before the judicial authority, an arbitration may be commenced or continued and an arbitral award made. Annexure 4 to the affidavit filed with this revision is the certified copy of the Constitution and Bye-laws of the Volleyball Federation of India. Its Article XVIII, reads as under : "ARTICLE No. XVIII: (a) Disputes / conflicts in member Association In the event of a dispute I conflict in a member Association or its constituents unit, a complete statement of case shall be submitted to the Federation. The case will be immediately put up by the Secretary General to the Executive Committee. If necessary an emergent meeting of the Executive Committee will be called. The Executives Committee will appoint an Arbitrator or a Committee of Arbitrators for the dispute I conflict who will gave the decision within 30 days of the submission of the case. All the disputes among the Member Association or its constituent unit shall be decided by reference to Arbitration alone as mentioned herein under the Arbitration Act, 1940. All the Member Association and its constituents are required to insert this clause in their Constitution by which they freely renounce their right to take the dispute / conflict before the Court of law without exploring all avenues and undertake to accept the decision of the Arbitrator. All the Member Association and its constituents are required to insert this clause in their Constitution by which they freely renounce their right to take the dispute / conflict before the Court of law without exploring all avenues and undertake to accept the decision of the Arbitrator. (b) Disputes / conflicts within the Federation All unresolved disputes arising between the Federation and its constituent members or between the office bearers of the Federation and the Federation or between the constituent members inter-se or between the office bearers of the Federation inter-se, subject to the provisions of the bye-laws of the Federation shall be referred to the IDA for settlement under the Arbitration Act, 1940. For this purpose the IDA shall elect a panel of arbitrators to be decided by the IDA General Assembly at their Annual General Meeting, out of whom parties to the disputes in the Federation will select one arbitrator each and third arbitrator, out of the said panel will be mutually agreed upon by the two arbitrators. The arbitration proceedings should be completed within the period specified in the Arbitration Act, or within the time extended by the arbitrators with the consent of the parties. The constituent members shall be deemed to continue its membership in the Federation on the specific condition that it voluntarily surrenders its right of seeking redress in and Court of law and undertake to accept the decision of the arbitrator subject to the provisions of Arbitration Act. Annexure 6 to the affidavit filed with the revision is the copy of the letter dated 28-07-2001, sent by defendant No.3, the then President of Uttaranchal Volleyball Association (plaintiff) through which the Volleyball Federation of India (defendant No.1 / revisionist) was informed that the Uttaranchal Volleyball Association (plaintiff) shall abide by the Article XVIII of the Constitution and Bye-laws. Real dispute in the present case Is between defendant No.3 and the plaintiff as the later has allegedly passed no confidence motion against former. That being so, dispute between the defendant No.3 and plaintiff-respondent is covered under Clause (a) of Article XVIII, as such, should have been referred to the Volleyball Federation of India (defendant No.1) for settlement of the dispute. In the circumstances, learned trial court has erred in law by not exercising the power under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In the circumstances, learned trial court has erred in law by not exercising the power under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Keeping in view of the principle of law laid down in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Pinkcity Midway Petroleums reported in (2003) 6 Supreme Court Cases Pg. 503, It is a fit case in which this Court should exercise its power under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and direct the trial court to refer the dispute to the Volleyball Federation of India (defendant No.1) for arbitration. 6.Accordingly, the revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 08-11-2004 is set aside with the observation as above.