Section 11 arbitration scrutiny is limited to existence of an agreement; limitation, fraud and non-arbitrability go to the tribunal.

At the Section 11 stage, the referral court's scrutiny is limited to a prima facie examination of whether an arbitration agreement exists under Section 7. It should not conduct a mini-trial on disputed facts or decide questions of limitation, non-arbitrability, or alleged serious fraud, because the competence-competence principle allows the arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction under Section 16. The existence of parallel criminal proceedings or other remedies does not, by itself, invalidate an otherwise valid arbitration agreement. These jurisdictional objections may therefore be raised before the tribunal rather than being finally determined by the referral court.

---

---

Issues: Whether, at the Section 11 stage, the referral court was confined to examining only the existence of an arbitration agreement and could leave questions of limitation, non-arbitrability, and alleged serious fraud to the arbitral tribunal.

Analysis: The scope of enquiry under Section 11(6A) is limited to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement. The statutory scheme, together with the doctrine of competence-competence, requires the referral court to restrict itself to formal existence under Section 7 and not conduct a mini-trial on disputed facts or validity. Questions whether the dispute is non-arbitrable because of alleged criminality or serious fraud, and whether limitation or other jurisdictional objections bar arbitration, are matters that may be raised before the arbitral tribunal, which has power under Section 16 to rule on its own jurisdiction. The presence of criminal proceedings or other parallel remedies does not by itself extinguish an otherwise valid arbitration agreement.

Conclusion: The referral court was correct in confining itself to the existence of the arbitration agreement, and the objections of non-arbitrability, limitation, and related jurisdictional pleas were left open for determination by the arbitral tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: At the Section 11 stage, the court's scrutiny is limited to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement, and jurisdictional objections such as serious fraud, non-arbitrability, and limitation are ordinarily for the arbitral tribunal to decide.

---