As per case facts, the Petitioner, M/s Ace Consultants, filed four arbitration petitions seeking an independent arbitrator for non-payment related to four allotment orders from 2012. After a Writ Petition ... and subsequent contempt proceedings, the Petitioner's claims were rejected by the Respondents. The contempt proceedings were closed in 2020, granting liberty to pursue other remedies. The Petitioner invoked the arbitration clause in 2023, and upon the Respondents' failure to act, filed the present petitions in 2025. The Respondents objected to the petitions' maintainability, arguing the claims were time-barred. The question arose whether the court, at the pre-referral stage under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, should reject arbitration petitions if the claims appear ex-facie time-barred. Finally, the Court ruled that its pre-referral jurisdiction is limited, and it should only reject a reference if claims are manifestly and without a vestige of doubt time-barred. Given that the arbitration clause was invoked within three years of the claim rejection, and the petitions filed within three years of invocation, the issue of limitation is to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal, not the court at this stage. Therefore, a Sole Arbitrator was appointed.