(1.) The present Appeal is filed under Sec. 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act") and impugns an order dtd. 30/8/2019 ("Impugned Order") by which the Learned Single Judge has dismissed the Appellants' challenge to an Arbitral Award dtd. 7/1/2019 ("Arbitral Award").
(2.) Before, however, adverting to the rival contentions, it is necessary to set out the following facts, viz.
(3.) Mr. Jha first assailed the Arbitral Award on the ground that the same was patently illegal, perverse, arbitrary, and whimsical. He invited our attention to the order of reference dtd. 12/9/2006 and pointed out that while the same had specifically referred "all the disputes and differences" to arbitration, the Arbitral Tribunal had completely ignored the written statement filed by the Appellants (who were the Defendants in both the Suits). He submitted that the Arbitral Tribunal had framed issues only taking into consideration the claim of the Firm i.e., the Plaintiff in both the Suits and not a single issue had been framed pertaining to the claims, contentions and/or disputes raised by the Appellants in the written statement. It was thus he submitted that the Arbitral Award was patently illegal, perverse, arbitrary, and whimsical and was liable to be set aside on this ground alone. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon the following judgments, namely Patel Engineering Limited Vs North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited (2020) 7 SCC 167), Associate Builders Vs. Delhi Development Authority (2015) 3 SCC 49), and Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. Saw Pipes Ltd. (2003) 5 SCC 705).