ORDER This petition under section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short Act), is instituted by a party to the Property Management and Services Agreements Annexures-A, B & C of even date dated 25-8-2008. 1st respondent and 3rd respondent are signatories to the said agreement, while the 2nd respondent is the Signatory to the Memorandum of Understanding dated 5-11-2008 Annexure-D, as between the 1st and 2nd respondents. 2. Petitioner submits that certain disputes having arisen in terms of the agreements Annexures-A, B, & C, led to legal notices and since there was no resolution of the disputes, notice dated 24-8-2010 Annexure-H, was issued nominating Sri. Justice G. Patri Basavana Goud, former Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, as an Arbitrator in terms of clause-35 in each of the agreements, where under parties had agreed for the appointment of an Arbitrator and third neutral Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties in accordance with the Indian law on Arbitration. 3. The order sheet discloses orders over whether the agreements Annexures-A, B & C, are duly stamped as required under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and regard being had to section 16(1)(a) of the Act and the decision of the Apex Court in M/s. SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd., v. M/s. Chandmari Tea Co., Pvt. Ltd.1, there can be no more dispute that this court can delink the arbitration agreement from the main document as an agreement independent of the other terms of agreements Annexures-A, B & C, assuming that they cannot be received as evidence of any transaction of property in question. There is no dispute that the arbitration agreement is valid and enforceable. 5. Therefore, the answer to the question that the agreements - Annexures-A, B & C though contained the nomenclature Property Management and Services Agreement, but, in fact, are lease deeds, require an adjudication and after a trial, record a finding as to whether or not the stamp duty is sufficient or insufficient. Such a trial, apparently, cannot be conveniently held by this court while exercising jurisdiction under section 11 of the Act and therefore must be adjudicated by the Arbitrator. 6. Learned counsel for the parties submit, on instructions from the parties, that Sri. Such a trial, apparently, cannot be conveniently held by this court while exercising jurisdiction under section 11 of the Act and therefore must be adjudicated by the Arbitrator. 6. Learned counsel for the parties submit, on instructions from the parties, that Sri. Justice G. Patri Basavana Goud, former Judge of this Court, be appointed as a sole arbitrator, to resolve the disputes that have arisen between the parties in terms of the agreements Annexures-A, B & C including a ruling on the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator under section 16(1)(a) and (b) of the Act. 7. In the result, this petition is accordingly allowed. 8. Sri. Justice G. Patri Basavana Goud, former Judge of this court is requested to enter upon reference and conduct arbitration proceedings before the Arbitration Centre Karnataka (Domestic and International) at Bangalore, in accordance with the Arbitration Centre Karnataka (Domestic and International), Rules, 2012. Petition allowed.