(c) That even of the assumption that arbitrability of the three claims is factually covered by the wide language of the arbitration clause in question here and that the suit is `in respect of a matter agreed to be referred to the arbitration ', in law, that is to say, under the law of the Forum (being the Indian Law in the instant case) the issue of arbitrability of the claims raised in the suit cannot be finally determined by the arbitrators but must rest with the 491 Court and, therefore, Renusagar 's suit cannot be stayed under section 3 ; in this behalf Counsel urged that both English Law as well as Indian Law is the same (the latter being the law of Forum here) and does not allow questions of arbitrators ' own jurisdiction to rest finally with the arbitrators and in support reliance was placed on a number of decisions English, American and Indian (particularly decision in Attorney General for Manitoba vs Kally & Ors.(1), Dalmia Dairy(2) case, Backer Auto Radio(3) case, Municipal Board vs Eastern U.P. Electric Supply Co. Ltd & Ors(4), M/s. Jagan Nath Phool Chand vs Union of India & Ors.,(5) R. Prince & Co. vs Governor General in Council(6), Vallabh Pitti vs Narsingdas(7) as well as certain passages in Russell on Arbitration 20th Edn.