1. By this petition filed under section 27 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the “Arbitration Act”) the petitioner seeks an order and direction for issuance of witness summons against various persons/entities with a direction to produce various documents set out in prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the petition before the learned arbitrator on 11th July, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under :

2. The petitioner is the claimant in the arbitration proceedings, whereas the respondents are the original respondents.

3. On 17th September, 2013 and 1st October, 2013, by consent of parties, a former Chief Justice of India was appointed as a sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties. The petitioner filed a statement of claim on 30th November, 2013. The statement of claim was resisted by the respondents by filing statement of defence. The parties led oral evidence before the learned arbitrator. The evidence of the petitioner was closed. The respondents have commenced the evidence of their witnesses. During the pendency of the evidence of the respondents, the petitioner applied for permission to examine more witnesses and to produce various documents.

4. The said application filed by the petitioner was vehemently opposed by the respondents before the learned arbitrator on various grounds.

5. After hearing both the parties, the learned arbitrator passed an order on 29th April, 2016, thereby granting approval to the petitioner for filing an application before this Court for issuance of witness summons to various witnesses described in the said application before the learned arbitrator. Pursuant to the said approval granted by the learned arbitrator in the order dated 29th April, 2016, the petitioner has filed this application under section 27 of the Arbitration Act for issuance of witness summons and for production of documents by invoking section 27 of the Arbitration Act. The application is vehemently opposed by the respondents. Since the application is opposed by the respondents, I have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents first.

6. Mr. Sancheti, the learned senior counsel for the respondents submits that merely because the learned arbitrator was of the opinion that certain witnesses were required to be examined and various documents were required to be produced through the said witnesses, this Court cannot pass an order mechanically under section 27 of the Arbitration Act. He submits that the said order cannot be implemented by this Court by exercising powers under section 27 of the Arbitration Act in view of various objections which were raised by the respondents before the learned arbitrator in a detailed affidavit filed in the said proceedings. He submits that one of the objection raised by the respondents before the learned arbitrator was that the petitioner had already closed its evidence and the respondents had already commenced the evidence. The cross-examination of the witness examined by the respondent had already commenced by the petitioner. He submits that there were several other objections raised by the respondents before the learned arbitrator for opposing the permission sought by the petitioner for taking the assistance of this Court under section 27 of the Arbitration Act.

7. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that this Court can go into the validity of the order passed by the learned arbitrator thereby granting permission to the petitioner to examine further witnesses after closing of evidence of the petitioner and for production of documents. My attention is invited to section 27 of the Arbitration Act and it is submitted that under the said provision, the learned arbitrator may apply to the Court for assistance in taking evidence. Under section 27(3) of the Arbitration Act, it is at the discretion of the Court to provide assistance and to order issuance of