(1.) This appeal under Sec. 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act") impugns the order dtd. 1/4/2022 in O.M.P. (COMM.) 402/2018, passed by the learned Single Judge of this court dismissing the appellant's petition under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, against an Arbitral Award dtd. 11/5/2018. Primarily, the ground of challenging the order under Sec. 34(2-A) of the Act is "patent illegality" appearing on the face of the Award.
(2.) The learned Senior Advocate for the appellant submits that the Award is against the public policy; that the respondent had been awarded compensation, which is unjustified and is contrary to the admitted facts; that the responsibility to maintain the structure, in which the licensed premises were housed, lay upon the licensee; that the licensed premises were taken after inspection by the licensee on 'as is where is basis'; the leakage in the roof of the structure was not to be repaired by the licensor; therefore damages, etc, as may have been caused to and claimed by the licensee, was entirely because the licensor failed in duly maintaining the structure or keeping it in good repair.
(3.) The aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge has dealt with the issue as under: