The court emphasized the limited scope of intervention under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the finality of the arbitrator's decision.

YOGESH KHANNA, J.

1. Petitioner by this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) impugns the arbitral award dated 29.08.2009.

2. The facts leading up to the filing of the present petition are set out hereunder:

(i) the Petitioner is a government body established by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India and has its office at C-139, Opposite Fortis Hospital, Sector 63, Noida-201301, Uttar Pradesh;

(ii) the Respondent is a company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands with its offices at c/o Walkers SPV Limited, Walker House, 87 Mary Street. George Town, Grand Cayman, KYI - 9002, Cayman Islands. The Respondent is engaged in the business of rendering services in the field of, inter alia, scientific research, drilling vessel and providing equipment and services for offshore scientific research;

(iii) the Petitioner had acquired oil and gas exploration rights from the Government of India for conducting Scientific Research and Development Programme under the National Gas Hydrate Programme for drilling/coring, logging and analytical activities to assess the characteristics of Gas Hydrates deposits in the Indian offshore ("Project");

(iv) the Respondent owned and operated a research vessel known as 'JOIDES Resolution' ("Vessel") which had the requisite capabilities for conducting research under the Project;

(v) the Petitioner, under the aegis of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, sought a consolidated proposal from the consortium consisting of the Respondent and Fugro McClelland Marine Geosciences Inc. ("Fugro") to undertake certain work under the Project;

(vi) the Respondent, on behalf of the consortium, submitted a proposal on 06.12.2005 to provide a full service gas hydrate investigative programme. In terms thereof, the Respondent and Fugro were to work with Integrated Ocean Drilling Programme ("lODP"), U.S. Geological Survey ("USGS"), U.S. Department of Energy and Lament Doherty Earth Observatory ("LDEO") of Columbia University;

(vii) an agreement dated 09.03.2006 was entered into between the Petitioner, Respondent and Fugro in respect of the Project ("Agreement"). Under the Agreement, the Respondent and Fugro were to act along with primary sub-contractors GEOTEK and LDEO. The Agreement further provided the Respondent would act as the leader of the consortium. A copy of the Agreement dated 09.03.2006 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P-2;

(viii) in terms of the Agreement, the Respondent was obligated to mobilize the Vessel together with the required scientific equipment and the scientific support staff to India for the purpose of conducting the scientific initiatives according to an approved scientific program contemplated in the Agreement. The Vessel was to be mobilized from Galveston, USA to Mumbai, India. The project involved research drilling, coring, logging and scientific analysis activities at ten (10) pre-defined sites in India. The analysis of the geologic data and samples collected during the gas hydrate research drilling/coring project was to continue after the completion of the program in collaboration with USGS. The scientists and technicians were to be provided through the series of subcontracts managed by Fugro and GEOTEK and developed in consultation with USGS and the Petitioner;

(ix) under the Agreement, certain cores and samples which were to be stored in Mumbai were to be offloaded from the Vessel by the Petitioner at the end of the expedition and it was the responsibility of the Petitioner to transport the same to Mumbai. However, certain samples were to be studied by international scientific parties including USGS and it was the responsibility of the consortium to transport the said samples to USGS laboratories in the USA and Canada and to other international scientific parties.

(x) the Petitioner was required to pay mobilization fees, demobilization fees, science support s