LAXMI MATHUR Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER MTNL MUMBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition is directed against an award dated 3-11-1999 delivered by the Arbitrator Shri Sunil K. Garg, Deputy General Manager, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. , Mumbai, who had been appointed as sole Arbitrator as per order of this Court dated 12-2-1999 in Arbitration Petition No. 430 of 1998 to decide the dispute between the parties, arising out of the an agreement dated 24-10-1995.

(2.) THE question sought to be canvassed before me is that the impugned award passed by the learned Arbitrator, referred to hereinabove is not legal and valid as the Arbitrator has recorded findings and failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances brought on record of the arbitration proceeding. In the submissions of the petitioner, the impugned award is therefore, liable to be set aside in exercise of the powers under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short ).

(3.) IN the light of the above submissions, the question which arises for my consideration is an to whether the impugned award needs to be set aside under section 34 of the Act ?