S.C. GUPTE, J.

1. This petition challenges an award passed by a sole arbitrator. The disputes between the parties arise out of High Seas Sales Agreements. Both parties had earlier filed their respective suits. The Respondent, who was the vendor, had filed a summary suit for recovery of amounts due to it on dishonoured cheques, whilst the Petitioner, who was the purchaser, had filed a suit for recovery of dues on account of defective goods. At the hearing of the summons for judgment in the Respondent's summary suit, the parties agreed to take their disputes before an arbitrator. The Respondent's summary suit was treated as a statement of claim, whilst the Petitioner's affidavit-in-reply to the summons for judgment and plaint in its own recovery suit were, respectively, treated as a written statement and counter-claim. Learned arbitrator, by his impugned award, allowed the Respondent's claims, whilst rejecting the Petitioner's counter-claims.

2. The Respondent had imported several raw materials/pharmaceutical drugs under a world bank project. The Petitioner herein, by its e-mail dated 16 August 2007, agreed to buy some of these materials on high seas sale basis. The materials included Riboflavin and Folic Acid along with some other materials. Various documents, such as high seas sale agreements and warehouse sale agreements, were executed by the parties. There were in all seven sales. The Respondent claims to have issued invoices towards these sales. Two sets of invoices appear to have been issued in this behalf. One set of invoices formed part of Exhibit R-5 collectively before the arbitrator (referred to hereinafter as 'R-Series invoices'), whilst the other set was invoices in Exhibits C-2 to C-8 (hereinafter referred to as 'C-Series invoices'). Whilst values of goods reflected in these two sets were the same in case of four invoices, in case of three (two for Riboflavin and one for Folic Acid), values reflected in the two sets were different. The aggregate invoice value of R-Series invoices was Rs.86,19,570/-, whereas that of C-Series was Rs.1,93,19,829/-. It appears that the Petitioner had handed over to the Respondent several cheques aggregating to about Rs.1.93 crores, out of which, cheques of an aggregate value of Rs.33,64,000/- were cleared, whilst 17 cheques of an aggregate value of Rs.1,59,00,400/- were dishonoured. It was the Respondent's case that these cheques were issued towards the purchase price of the goods in accordance with C-Series invoices. The Respondent had sued the Petitioner for the value of dishonoured cheques. The Petitioner inter alia pleaded the bar of limitation to oppose the claim. On merits, the Petitioner denied having agreed to purchase the material (namely, Riboflavin and Folic Acid) at the rates mentioned in C-Series invoices. According to it, the correct invoices were the R-Series invoices, which were received along with covering letters of the Respondent. Based on the Respondent's statement that R-Series invoices were issued at the instance of the Petitioner so as to understate the value of the imported goods for the purposes of customs duty, it was alternatively submitted by the Petitioner that having been party to deception of the revenue by means of issuance of R-Series invoices so as to understate the import value for customs duty, the Respondent ought not to be permitted to assert any right or claim arising out of such transaction, since such transaction was based upon an illegal and fraudulent act. The Petitioner, in other words, set up a plea of ex turpi causa non oritur action in pari delicto portiorest condition possidentis, based on which it prayed for rejection of the Respondent's claim. In his impugned award, the arbitrator held that the Petitioner could not evade its liability under the principle of ex turpi causa non oritur actio. The arbitrator held that the analysis of the plaint and the case pleaded and proved before him showed that the Respondent's claim was based o