ORDER This petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the Act’) prays for appointment of an Arbitrator as it is averred that the petitioner and respondent are parties to an agreement containing a clause for appointment of an ‘Arbitrator’ being unable to concur for a common Arbitrator. 2. Respondents have been put on notice and have raised a preliminary objection. 3. While agreement itself is not disputed including the clauses and the terms of the agreement, what is pointed out by Sri Cristopher, learned Counsel for the respondent is that there is a clause ousting the jurisdiction of all other Courts except Courts at Tandur and Hyderabad agreed to between the parties for resolving any dispute arising under the agreement in question and therefore submits that this Court cannot entertain a petition of this nature. 4. Sri Giridhar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the preliminary objection is not tenable; that what the clause provides for is that there cannot be any adjudication of the dispute before the Court other than the Court at Tandur and Hyderabad; what the petitioner has sought for is not adjudication of the dispute itself, but a mere appointment of an Arbitrator and not requesting this Court to adjudicate upon any dispute that arises between the parties and therefore this Court can nevertheless entertain the present petition for the purpose of appointment of an Arbitrator. 5. It is quite possible to take either the narrow view or a comprehensive view of the clause providing for ouster of jurisdiction and confining the jurisdiction to a particular Court by agreement to the parties. No doubt the parties cannot by consent ouster jurisdiction of any Court but can restrict the jurisdiction to one of the Courts where cause of action arises, within territorial jurisdiction of several Courts and parties choose to confine their actions before one such Court to the exclusion of other Courts. Such an agreement binds the parties to the agreement and Courts will honour it. 6. Such an agreement binds the parties to the agreement and Courts will honour it. 6. While it is no doubt true that the petition under Section 11(6) of the Act is not a petition for adjudication of the dispute itself, it is nevertheless one in the context of some dispute as between the parties arising under the agreement, particularly, the parties having failed to agree on a common Arbitrator and related to the agreement and not independent or de hors the agreement. 7. If the parties themselves have agreed to restrict the jurisdiction of the Court even in respect of such matters, then it is for the petitioner to move the agreed Court with jurisdiction and it is for this reason this petition is rejected without being examined any further.