( 1 ) THE scope and powers of the Courts to interfere with the conclusions of the Arbitrators in non-speaking awards, have been clearly demarcated and defined by authoritative pronouncements of the various High Courts and the Supreme Court. There is no use to state the well settled principle of law laid down in this behalf, except to keep in mind that prima facie in view of the non-speaking nature of the award the Court is not required to go into the findings of fact. The arbitrator having decided the disputes between the parties in a manner which appeared to him most just and reasonable, will not entitle the Court to speculete, where no reasons are given, as to what impelled him to arrive at a particular conclusion. It is presumed that the Arbitrator arrived at his conclusion by a certain process of reasoning. It is also well settled that it is not open to the Court to attempt to probe the mental process by which the Arbitrator has reached his conclusion, where it is not disclosed by the terms of the award. The Court cannot re-examine and reappraise the evidence and to sit in appeal over the conclusion of the Arbitrator in proceedings to set aside the award. The mere d