As per case facts, the appellant was awarded construction work, and a dispute arose regarding non-payment, leading to a Section 11 Application in the High Court. An Arbitrator was appointed, ... and the award favored the appellant. The respondents challenged this, arguing that the contract clause was not an arbitration agreement, and the Commercial Court and High Court set aside the award. The appellant then appealed to the Supreme Court. The question arose whether the lower courts were justified in setting aside the award by re-evaluating the arbitration agreement's existence and validity, given the Arbitrator's appointment under the pre-2015 SBP & Co. regime. Finally, the Supreme Court held that under the SBP & Co. regime, the Section 11 court's decision on the arbitration agreement's existence and validity was binding and attained finality as it was unchallenged. Thus, the lower courts erred in re-examining this issue. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and remitted the matter for other objections.