Section 11 referral inquiry is limited to arbitration agreement existence; non-arbitrability objections go to the arbitral tribunal

Under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the referral court's inquiry is confined to the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement, as reinforced by Section 11(6A) and the 2015 amendment. At the appointment stage, the court cannot dissect claims, pre-judge non-arbitrability, or exclude matters said to fall within excepted clauses. Those objections may be raised before the arbitral tribunal, which is competent to decide them in accordance with law. The High Court was therefore not justified in excluding identified claims at the Section 11 stage, and the plea of non-arbitrability was left open for the tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether, while exercising power under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court is confined to examining the existence of an arbitration agreement and whether it can exclude claims as non-arbitrable or falling within excepted matters.

Analysis: Section 11(6A), inserted by the 2015 amendment, limits the referral court's inquiry to the existence of an arbitration agreement. The statutory object of the amendment was to confine judicial scrutiny at the appointment stage to a prima facie arbitration agreement and not to other issues. In the light of the later three-Judge Bench view reaffirming that the scope of inquiry at the referral stage is limited to the existence of the arbitration agreement, the referral court cannot bisect the claims and pre-judge non-arbitrability or excepted matters. Such objections may be raised before the arbitral tribunal, which can decide them in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The High Court was not justified in excluding identified claims at the Section 11 stage; the plea of non-arbitrability was to be left open for decision by the arbitral tribunal.

---