Arbitration reference rights survive a mere extension request for filing the written statement under Section 8.

An application seeking extension of time to file a written statement is not the first statement on the substance of the dispute under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. A mere procedural request for more time, without any defence on the merits or submission to the court's jurisdiction, does not amount to a waiver of the right to seek reference to arbitration. The nature of the step taken determines waiver, and a simple request for enlargement of time is insufficient. The application for extension therefore did not forfeit the arbitration right.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application seeking extension of time to file the written statement amounts to the first statement on the substance of the dispute for the purpose of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, so as to waive the right to seek reference to arbitration.

Analysis: Section 8 requires a party seeking arbitration to apply before submitting its first statement on the substance of the dispute. The expression is distinct from a mere procedural request for enlargement of time to file the written statement. An application that does not disclose any defence on the merits and does not indicate submission to the court's jurisdiction cannot be treated as a first statement on the substance of the dispute. The question whether the party has waived the arbitration clause must be gathered from the nature of the step taken, and a simple request for time does not amount to such waiver.

Conclusion: The application for extension of time to file the written statement did not constitute the first statement on the substance of the dispute, and the right to seek arbitration was not waived.

---