R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J.:- Thi s appeal arises from the order dated 30-4-1998 passed in Arbitration Petition No.122 of 1998. By the impugned order, the appellants' petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, hereinafter called as "the said Act", has been dismissed. The challenge in the matter is three-fold. Firstly, that the award declared by the arbitrator is beyond the scope of the reference to arbitration. Secondly, the arbitrator failed to consider the important and relevant document, namely, the letter dated 15-7-1996 while the document, if considered; the conclusions arrived at by the learned arbitrator would have been different from those arrived at. Thirdly, the finding of the arbitrator about the shortage of 1350 metric ton (for short, M.T.) in loading the material is contrary to the materials on record in as much that in fact the shortage was only to the extent of 350 M.T.

2. The respondents herein received an order on 16-4-1996 from a French buyer S.I. Lessafre for export of 60,000 M.T. of molasses, to be shipped in three lots of 20,000 M.T. each. The buyer agreed to pay the actual freight and demurrage charges in addition to the price of DS$ 40

Click Here to Read the rest of this document