MANAV ENTERPRISES Vs. RATHI STEEL & POWER LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 30 th September, 2013 passed by the learned Arbitrator in the arbitration proceedings between the petitioner and respondent on the application of the petitioner under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 questioning the authority, scope and jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal conducting the arbitration proceedings.

(2.) MR .Chetan Sharma, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has mainly argued that the appointed arbitrator is an employee of the respondent and working as General Manager (Commercial), deriving monetary benefits on regular basis and has every reason for being biased in view of his position and interest. The learned Arbitrator was actively involved in the business transaction as that of confirmation of delivery of goods and payment to the petitioner.

(3.) AS far as the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned, no doubt the petitioner may have some merit in the petition as alleged. But, the petitioner is not able to satisfy the Court with regard to the maintainability of the present petition in view of the settled law on this aspect. In the case of SBP & Co. Vs. Patel Engineering Ltd. and Anr., (2005) 8 SCC 618 which was subsequently followed in the case of SBP & Co. Vs. Patel Engineering Ltd. and Anr., 2009 (10) SCC 293. Relevant paras 45, 46 and 47 of SBP & Co. (supra) read as under: