JUDGMENT

B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.:- The facts of this case reminded us of what this Court observed in M/s. Guru Nanak Foundation v. M/s. Rattan Singh and Sons, (1981) 4 SCC 634 : (AIR 1981 SC 2075, Para 1) :

"Interminable, item consuming, complex and expensive Court procedures impelled jurists to search for an alternative forum, less formal, more effective and speedy for resolution of disputes avoiding procedural claptrap and this led them to Arbitration Act, 1940 (Act for short). However, the way in which the proceedings under the Act are conducted and without an exception challenged in Courts, has made lawyers laugh and legal philosophers weep. Experience shows and law reports bear ample testimony that the proceedings under the Act have become highly technical accompanied by unending proxility at every stage providing a legal trap to the unwary. Informal forum chosen by the parties for expeditious disposal of their disputes has by the decisions of the Courts been clothed with legalise of unenforseeable complexity. This case amply demonstrates the same."

2. The facts speak for themselves.

The Board of Trustees, Madras port Trust, invited tenders in the year 1957 for certain works at th