R.K. Gauba ORDER
R.K. Gauba, J.
1. These appeals have been brought before this Court invoking Section 37(1)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended by Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, to assail two orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), one dated 13.07.2017 of a larger bench (of three members) answering a question of law on a reference earlier made by a bench presided over by a single member and the other dated 28.08.2017 of the bench which had earlier made the said reference, thereby dismissing the identical applications of the appellants herein seeking a reference under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 of the disputes which are the subject matter of consumer complaints of the respondents against the appellants, presently pending consideration.
2. It may be mentioned here that the consumer complaints were instituted by the respective respondents before the NCDRC with reference, inter alia, to similar buyer's agreements that had been entered upon by the parties wherein the said complainants have raised consumer disputes primarily on the ground of failure on the part of the appellants to deliver timely possession of the residential villas (flats/plots, etc.) being developed by it in Mohali (and other places) seeking directions either for immediate delivery and possession or, in the alternative, for other reliefs including compensation. It appears that upon being served with the notices, the appellants submitted the applications under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 referring to an arbitration clause in each such buyer's agreement and praying for a reference accordingly. The bench presided over by a single member had referred, to the larger bench, the question of law as to whether Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended by Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 mandates the consumer forum constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to refer the parties to arbitration in terms of a valid arbitration agreement notwithstanding other provisions of both the said enactments. The larger bench, by its order dated 13.07.2017, answered the said question of law in the negative holding that the arbitration clause in such agreements between the complainants and the builder cannot circumscribe the jurisdiction of consumer fora notwithstanding the amendment made in Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Following the said decision of the larger bench, the bench presided over by the single member, by identical orders passed on the two said complaints, on 28.08.2018 dismissed the applications of the appellants under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 thereby declining to make such reference.
3. The first and foremost issue that needs to be considered at the threshold is as to whether these appeals can be maintained before this Court. The learned senior counsel for the appellants has been heard at length and the record has been perused.
4. Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to the extent relevant here, reads as under:-
"(1) An appeal shall lie from the following orders (and from no others) to the Court authorised by law to hear appeals from original decrees of the Court passing the order, namely:-
(a) refusing to refer the parties to arbitration under Sectio........