(b) That Renusagar 's suit is not a suit "in respect of any matter agreed to be referred to arbitration" as required by section 3 of the Foreign Awards Act and, therefore, the stay sought by G.E.C. should be refused; in other words, Counsel urged that the phrase "in respect of my matter agreed to be referred arbitration" occurring in section 3 should be construed to cover only disputes or claims on merits referred to the arbitrators and not issues as to the existence, validity or effect of the arbitration agreed, (particularly its scope that is the arbitrability of the claims) and for placing such narrow construction on the relevant phrase occurring in section 3 Counsel mainly relied on a decision of this Court in Shiva Jute Baling Ltd. vs Hindley Co.(1) where this Court, while construing section 35 in the context of section 33 and section 34 of the , has on the facts in the case held that there could be no identity of the subject matter under reference to the arbitrator and the subject matter of a section 33 petition, that is to say, the issues and prayers that from the basis of an application under section 33 could not be subject matter of the reference to the arbitrators ; Counsel also relied upon three more decisions of this Court in Khardah Company 's case (supra), Waverly Jute Mills ' case (supra) and M/s. R.N. Ganekar & Co 's(2) case where, according to Counsel, observations supporting the above view have been made.