K.M.Shemi vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd on 10 January, 2010
That
order is challenged invoking the visitorial jurisdiction vested
with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
No doubt, this Court can exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction
under exceptional circumstances, even while the arbitration
proceedings are in progress, where it is shown that the order
passed by the arbitrator is either wholly arbitrary or illegal. But
the power vested with this Court which can be so exercised only
sparingly, that too under exceptional circumstances, and, also,
having regard to the provisions covered by the Arbitration Act,
for short, the 'Act' wherein the arbitrator appointed by the court
or agreed upon by the parties, without the intervention of the
O.P.(C).NO.1199/2012 3
court, is empowered to arbitrate whatever disputes covered by
the proceedings, cannot be exercised to test the correctness or
merit of the interim orders of the arbitrator unless it is patently
shown to be illegal and unsustainable. This Court in Amarjith v.
Kamala (2008 (1) KLT 599) has held that it is not permissible
for High Courts to entertain a petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India against an interlocutory order passed by an
arbitrator. Any party aggrieved by the order of the arbitrator
who has a right of appeal under Section 37 of the Act has to wait
until the award is passed. True, there could be an exception
where a case is made out to challenge the order of the arbitrator
invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court satisfying
that the order passed by the arbitrator is wholly arbitrary and
illegal. No such case has been made out by the petitioner to
challenge Ext.P5 order of the arbitrator. I find no reason to
interfere with Ext.P5 order of the arbitrator invoking the
extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court.