JUDGMENT : ARUN BHANSALI, J. This application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the applicant seeking appointment of appropriate arbitrator to resolve and settle the dispute between the parties in terms of agreement dated 07.01.2013 executed between the parties. 2. On an objection being raised regarding the agreement dated 07.01.2013 being deficiently stamped, by order dated 11.08.2017, it was ordered as under:- “In view of the present facts, while keeping the petitioner's right reserve to challenge the very levy and quantum of stamp duty, including the person liable for such duly, to be raised at appropriate stage and before appropriate forum, the petitioner is directed to produce the original agreement dated 07.01.2013 before the Collector (Stamps), Jodhpur, who shall determine the appropriate stamp duty leviable upon the instrument, namely agreement dated 07.01.2013. Requisite steps be taken within a period of fifteen days from today. The Collector (Stamps) is directed to determine the stamp duty payable on the subject agreement, within a period of one month, from the date of tendering of the original agreement, alongwith the requisite application and certified copy of the order instant.” 3. Pursuant thereto, the Sub-Registrar determined the requisite stamp duty. 4. By order dated 23.02.2018, it was directed by this Court as under:- “By order dated 11.08.2017, when an objection was raised about insufficiency of the stamp duty paid on the agreement dated 07.01.2013 (Annexure-1), a Coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order:- “In view of the present facts, while keeping the petitioner's right reserve to challenge the very levy and quantum of stamp duty, including the person liable for such duly, to be raised at appropriate stage and before appropriate forum, the petitioner is directed to produce the original agreement dated 07.01.2013 before the Collector (Stamps), Jodhpur, who shall determine the appropriate stamp duty leviable upon the instrument, namely agreement dated 07.01.2013. Requisite steps be taken within a period of fifteen days from today. The Collector (Stamps) is directed to determine the stamp duty payable on the subject agreement, within a period of one month, from the date of tendering of the original agreement, alongwith the requisite application and certified copy of the order instant.” Pursuant to the directions, the Collector (Stamps) has by his order dated 30.10.2017 determined the duty payable on the document at Rs. 8,48,430/-, other than interest. 8,48,430/-, other than interest. Whereafter by order dated 12.01.2018, time was granted to counsel for the applicant to complete his instructions, if the applicant wants to pay the requisite stamp duty as determined by the Sub-Registrar. Today, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is prepared to deposit the requisite stamp duty by 31.03.2018 and further seeks liberty to pursue the aspect regarding liability to pay the requisite stamp duty before the appropriate forum. In view of the submissions made, which are apparently reasonable in the circumstances of the case, the applicant is granted time till 31.03.2018 to pay/deposit the requisite stamp duty with the Sub-Registrar in terms of the order dated 30.10.2017 and produce the certificate before this Court. The applicant would be free to take appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum for determination of liability to pay the duty. In case the requisite is not filed by 06.04.2018, the arbitration application filed by the applicant would be liable to be dismissed. List on 06.04.2018.” 5. On 06.04.2018, when the petitioner sought further time to comply with the directions dated 23.02.2018, the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is unaware of the fact as to whether pursuant to the order dated 23.02.2018, the petitioner has paid the requisite stamp duty to the sub-registrar. By order dated 23.02.2018, it was directed as under:- “Today, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is prepared to deposit the requisite stamp duty by 31.03.2018 and further seeks liberty to pursue the aspect regarding liability to pay the requisite stamp duty before the appropriate forum. In view of the submissions made, which are apparently reasonable in the circumstances of the case, the applicant is granted time till 31.03.2018 to pay/deposit the requisite stamp duty with the Sub-Registrar in terms of the order dated 30.10.2017 and produce the certificate before this Court. The applicant would be free to take appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum for determination of liability to pay the duty. In case the requisite is not filed by 06.04.2018, the arbitration application filed by the applicant would be liable to be dismissed. The applicant would be free to take appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum for determination of liability to pay the duty. In case the requisite is not filed by 06.04.2018, the arbitration application filed by the applicant would be liable to be dismissed. List on 06.04.2018” In view of the fact that the petitioner was granted almost six weeks' time to do the needful and today counsel for the petitioner is unaware of the fact as to whether the needful has been done or not, list the application on 20.04.2018. If the needful is not done by the said date, it would be deemed that the agreement Annex.-1 is deficiently stamped and as such the document cannot be used for any purpose in terms of Section 35 of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998, the arbitration application filed by the petitioner shall stand dismissed.” 6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite the directions dated 23.02.2018 and 06.04.2018, the requisite stamp duty has not been paid by the petitioner. 7. In view of the above fact situation, the agreement dated 07.01.2013 remains deficiently stamped. 8. Section 39 of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 inter-alia provides as under:- “Section 39. Instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence, etc.-No instrument chargeable with duty under this Act shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped:” 9. The provision specifically provides that the document chargeable with duty and insufficiently stamped cannot be used for any purpose. 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd., (2011) 14 SCC 66 has laid down that a arbitration agreement contained in deficiently stamped document cannot be acted upon and arbitrator cannot be appointed based on such arbitration agreement. 11. In view of the above law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the fact that document dated 07.01.2013 is deficiently stamped, the application filed by the petitioner cannot be entertained, the same is, therefore, dismissed.