The Court cannot go into the validity of the order passed by the learned arbitrator granting permission to the respondent for seeking assistance of the Court in taking evidence under Section 27 of the Arbitration Act.

By this review petition filed under Section 114 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, the petitioner seeks recall of the order dated 11th September 2015 passed by this Court in arbitration petition which was filed by the respondent herein under Sections 27(1) and 27(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, inter alia, praying for an order and direction against the review petitioner to provide access and inspection to the entire claim file of the respondent herein from the claim intimation letter till the claim discharge voucher on the records of the review petitioner along with all its proceedings therein and sought permission to have the photocopies certified by the review petitioner. The respondent herein had also applied for issuance of witness summons to three persons including the two of the Surveyors appointed by the review petitioner. The respondent herein was the original claimant whereas, the review petitioner was the original respondent in the arbitral proceedings.

2. At the threshold, learned counsel appearing for the respondent herein (original petitioner) raises an issue of maintainability of this review petition on the ground that there is no provision under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which permits filing of a review petition. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this review petition are as under :-

3. The review petitioner had issued a policy in favour of the respondent herein. The dispute arose between the parties. By an order dated 17th November 2014 passed by the learned designate of the Chief Justice, a Senior Advocate of this Court came to be appointed as a Sole Arbitrator for deciding the dispute between the parties arising out of the said policy issued by the review petitioner. It was clarified that the issue as to 'whether there was an accord and satisfaction and discharge of the contract' shall be decided by the learned arbitrator and it would also be open to the review petitioner to lead evidence before the arbitrator to establish that there was a valid and binding discharge of the contract by way of accord and satisfaction.

4. On 5th January 2015, the learned arbitrator, upon hearing both the parties through their learned counsel and by consent of the parties, issued various directions. It was directed in the said Minutes of meeting that the next meeting of the tribunal would be held on 13th February 2015 for further directions regarding inspection of documents, admission and denial of documents, for settling the issues/points for determination and for giving further directions regarding filing affidavits of evidence, cross-examination etc. In the said Minutes of meeting, the learned arbitrator has also recorded the agreement of the parties that the service of pleadings, applications, notices and communication etc. shall be considered as sufficient, if effected upon the learned advocates on record representing the parties at their addresses mentioned in the said Minutes of meeting. At the relevant time, Ms.Sneha S.Diwedi, Advocate was representing the review petitioner and Mr.Shabbir T. Kapadia, Advocate was representing the respondent herein. Pursuant to the said directions issued by the learned arbitrator, the parties filed their pleadings along with the documents.

5. The next meeting was held by the learned arbitrator on 27th March 2015. The parties had exchanged the draft issues. The learned arbitrator recorded that the claimant's advocate had informed that the documents which the claimant would be relying upon had already been annexed to the statement of claim filed by the claimant/ respondent herein. The learned arbitrator directed the review petitioner to file its compilation of documents on or before 17th April 2015 and further directed that the admission and denial of the documents of both sides shall be completed on or before 13th April 2015. In paragraph 8 of the said Minutes of meeting, the learned arbitrator recorded the statement made by the