BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. ( 1 ) IA 3618/2005 is an application filed on behalf of the defendant No. 2 under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 stating that the suit be referred to adjudication by an Arbitral Tribunal inasmuch as there is an arbitration clause which governs the relationship between the parties. IA 177/2006 is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiff which also acknowledges the same fact. ( 2 ) THE learned counsel for the defendant No. 2 submitted that the defendants 1 and 3 are neither necessary nor proper parties to the disputes which arise in the present suit. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has no objection for the deletion of defendants 1 and 3 from the array of the parties. They are deleted. The learned counsel for the defendant No. 2 also submits that plaintiffs 3 and 4 are also not necessary and proper parties as they have nothing to do with the transaction with the disputes covered by this suit. The learned counsel for the plaintiff, however, submits that he would take instructions in this matter and appropriately move the Arbitral Tribunal before which the subject matter of the suit is to be referred to. ( 3 ) THE learned counsel for the parties submit that there is no difficulty if the disputes arising in the present suit are referred to the Arbitrators, namely, Hon ble Mr Justice Devinder Gupta (Retd), Shri Ram K Watel, Advocate and shri Girish Aggarwal, Advocate in terms of Section 8 of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties herein. It is ordered accordingly. In the meanwhile, till the arbitrators take up the matter on merits, the order passed on 19. 01. 2005 with regard to protection of the property bearing No. S-479, Greater Kailash, Ground floor, Part II, New Delhi and property No. 145, Sultanpur, Mehrauli, New Delhi shall continue. With these directions, these applications as well as the suit stand disposed of. The parties shall approach the Arbitral Tribunal within ten days. Dasti. .