JUDGMENT

RAJU DORAISWAMY, J.

(1) A skeletal reference to the facts, without much emphasis on the details of merits of the case, would help to appreciate certain submissions, at the time of actual consideration of the claims projected before us.

(2) THE respondent, State of Sikkim, and the appellant, M/s Sikkim Subba Associates (referred throughout as appellants), claimed to be a firm of Partnership, entered into an agreement on 22 -1-1991 under which the appellants have been appointed as the "organising agents" for its lotteries enumerated therein subject to the terms and conditions more fully set out .therein regulating the rights and obligations of the parties. It needs to be kept in view that since running of private lotteries would constitute a criminal offence, some of the States have allowed parties, to put on the apparel of the State in return for a stipulated fee to mobilise funds, in public interest to undertake public works. Disputes and misunderstanding arose which led to the termination of the agreement resulting in the appellants seeking recourse to litigation by getting an Arbitrator appointed invoking the powers under Section 8 of the Arb