Vikramajit Sen, J.

1. The question in this bunch of Appeals concerns the legal proprietary of judicial directions for the removal of an arbitrator even before the publishing of an Award. Several judgments of our esteemed Single Benches have been cited before us, a perusal of which manifests the existence of a polarity of opinion. On one side of the watershed is the view that assertions as to the de jure or de facto incompetence of the Arbitral Tribunal must immediately be addressed by the Court, and in deserving cases remedied, whilst on the other side is the contrary view that the statutorily provided procedure postulates an immediate remonstration but a deferred assailment of the Award, inter alia on this ground, by way of an invocation of Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act for short).

2. At the threshold, an objection has been lodged to the maintainability of the Appeals on the ground that Section 37 of the A&C Act provides for such remedy only against orders (a) granting or refusing to grant any measure under Section 9 or (b) setting aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the A&C Act. In Cref Finance Ltd. v. Puri