S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. This appeal, under Section 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) challenges the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 29.08.2012, dismissing the appellant’s objections under Section 34 of the said Act, to an Award.

2. The brief facts are that the respondents (collectively known as “Phafag” in arbitral proceedings, and in the impugned judgment, and referred to as such) entered into two agreements with the appellant (hereafter “Morepen”) on 01.07.2002. The first was a Technical Know-how/License Agreement (“TKHL agreement”) and the second was a Market Services Agreement (MSA). Article 1.9 of the TKHL agreement defined “Products” as the “medical formulation containing the active ingredient Caroverine……………..conforming to the specifications as prescribed by the authorities concerned and such other like items as may be mutually agreed upon between the parties to the agreement”. The “Technical Know-how” was defined as in Article 1.12 as follows:

“1.12 “Technical Know-how” shall mean the technology techniques drawings, and designs, know-how procedures, process system and other value addition provided by Pha