O.P.No.101 of 2011 The Hon'ble Chief Justice Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the original owner / respondent no.2 has entered into an agreement to sell for the property in question with the first respondent, who, in turn, entered into a back-to-back agreement with the petitioner. The second respondent settled the property in favour of her children respondents 4 to 6, who, in turn, sold the property to respondent no.7 and the first respondent cancelled the agreement with respondent no.2. Respondent no.3 is stated to be the named Arbitrator. 2.It is not in dispute that the arbitration clause only exists in the agreement between the petitioner and the first respondent, being Clause 19, at page 11 of the typed set. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioner faced with the position of absence of first respondent before the Court and the defence raised by learned counsel for respondent no.7 of absence of any arbitration agreement with any other party, seeks to examine the matter. List on 05.09.2014. B/o sra 28.08.2014