Bharati Sapru, J.:- Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Indian Oil Corporation against an order dated 25.3.2009 passed by the District Judge, Bhadohi, Gyanpur by which the Court below has come to the conclusion that the matter between the petitioner and the respondents need not be referred to an Arbitrator. 3. The facts of the case are that the Lease Deed was executed between the petitioner and the respondents on 25.8.2000 for the land situated in Village Mahuwari, Pargana Bhadohi, Tehsil Gyanpur, District Sant Ravidas Nagar. The term of the lease was for 30 years, fixing a monthly rent of Rs.8000/-. The land had been given on rent to the petitioner to establish a retail outlet for petrol. The Lease Deed contained an Arbitration Clause. 4. However, on 1.5.2008, Suit No.123 of 2008 was filed in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhadohi against the petitioner by one Rajnath (respondent) with a prayer that the petitioner Indian Oil Corporation be restrained from changing the nature of land and that it should not do the business of petroleum product retail on the premises in dispute. 5. On 6.5.2008 the present petitioner filed a preliminary objection under Section 5 & 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with a prayer to refer the dispute between the parties to an Arbitrator. 6. The application filed by the petitioner along with an affidavit is on record as Annexure-3. The affidavit, which is on record states in paragraph no.4, as hereunder:- "That, in presence of arbitration agreement in the Lease Deed, suit is barred u/s 5 and 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The photostat copy of Lease Deed is annexed with affidavit." 7. The Trial Court passed an order on 28.5.2008 accepting this contention of the petitioner. 8. Against this order a revision was filed by the respondent nos. 2 to 4 being Civil Revision No.62 of 2008 in the Court of the District Judge, Bhadohi, who has set aside the order dated 28.5.2008 and, therefore, the Civil Suit is to proceed. 9. The Trial Court passed an order on 28.5.2008 accepting this contention of the petitioner. 8. Against this order a revision was filed by the respondent nos. 2 to 4 being Civil Revision No.62 of 2008 in the Court of the District Judge, Bhadohi, who has set aside the order dated 28.5.2008 and, therefore, the Civil Suit is to proceed. 9. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the two grounds on which the order has been passed are wrong and not justified i.e. firstly that the original Lease Deed was not filed along with the application under Section 8, which is a condition precedent and secondly that at the time of the first hearing an application was not filed by the petitioner to refer the matter to arbitration. 10. Learned Counsel has argued that since there is no objection by the respondents denying the photo copy of the dealership agreement it would imply that the arbitration agreement is accepted by the respondents and, therefore, the matter should be referred to arbitration. For this purpose he relies on a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Vs. M/s Gupta Tourist Bus Service in First Appeal From Order No.1141 of 2006. 11. In reply to this submission made by the counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the respondent, Sri G.K. Singh has relied on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Atul Singh & others Vs. Sunil Kumar Singh & others reported in (2008) 2 Supreme Court Cases page 602. 12. He has argued that from the facts as they emerge from the case it is fully established that the petitioner had not filed the original agreement and had also not filed a duly certified copy of the original agreement as is mandated under Section 8 (2) of the Arbitration Act. Section 8 (2) of the Arbitration Act reads as hereunder :- "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. 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 sub-section (1) and that the issue is pending before the judicial authority, an arbitration may be commenced or continued and an arbitral award made." 13. He has argued that the non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 8(2) of the Act are fatal and, thus, the application for referring the matter to arbitration could not have been allowed but in the present case have been rightly rejected for reasons that it was only a photostat copy of the agreement, which was filed along with the application. 14. I have heard learned Counsels on both sides. 15. The position of law is clear. The facts are also clear in this matter. The petitioner has failed to comply with the mandatory conditions required under Section 8(2) of the Act and, therefore, the consequences are fatal. His application for Arbitration have rightly been rejected. The petitioner has not complied with the mandatory provisions of Section 8(2) of the Arbitration Act and it is for this reason that the Civil Suit filed by the respondents is maintainable and liable to proceed and the prayer made by the petitioner to refer the matter to Arbitration has failed. 16. The order passed by the Court below is well considered and justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. 17. Accordingly, this writ petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed.