No prima facie arbitration agreement existed with two respondents; impleadment was left to the arbitrator.

The petitioner sought appointment of a sole arbitrator, relying on arbitration clauses in a Builder Buyer Agreement and a Loan Agreement.

At the hearing, the petitioner clarified that its reference to Clause 31 in the petition’s prayer was a typographical error and should read Clause 11

The judgment records that the petitioner’s notice dated 19 May 2026 invoked arbitration against all three respondents under Clause 31 of the Builder Buyer Agreement and Clause 11 of the Loan Agreement; the dates of those agreements are recorded inconsistently in the judgment

The Court noted that the existence of an arbitration agreement was undisputed as against Respondent No. 3, but found no prima facie arbitration agreement between the petitioner and Respondents No. 1 and 2

Whether a sole arbitrator should be appointed where the existence of an arbitration agreement is undisputed as against Respondent No. 3

Whether Respondents No. 1 and 2 could be included in the arbitration despite there being no prima facie arbitration agreement between them and the petitioner

Under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court’s inquiry is confined to the prima facie existence of a valid arbitration agreement.

The arbitrator must furnish the disclosures required by Section 12(2) of the Act.

Questions including arbitrability and jurisdiction may be raised before the arbitrator for determination in accordance with law.

No judicial precedent is cited.

Because the existence of an arbitration agreement with Respondent No. 3 was undisputed, the Court found no impediment to appointing a sole arbitrator.

As it found no prima facie arbitration agreement between the petitioner and Respondents No. 1 and 2, it did not direct their inclusion; instead, it left the petitioner at liberty to apply for their impleadment before the arbitrator.

The Court also reserved the parties’ objections concerning arbitrability and jurisdiction for the arbitrator and clarified that its observations would not affect the merits of those issues.

The petitioner may apply to implead Respondents No. 1 and 2 before the arbitrator, who may determine any objections in accordance with law.