Basant, J. –

(i) Are the findings of the Arbitrator

(a) that the claimant is not bound by the stipulation No.7 in Ext.C10 and

(b) that the claimant can take advantage of the other stipulations in Ext.C10 correct and justified?

(ii) Can those findings be held to be illegal perverse, unjust or immoral?

(iii) Can the award passed by the Arbitrator be consequently held to be opposed to the public policy of India?

(iv) Are those vices sufficient to justify the interference by the District Court with the award of the Arbitrator under Section 34 (2) (b) (ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’)?

These questions are thrown up for consideration in this appeal.

2. A brief resume of the events that have led to this appeal appears to be necessary. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the claimant’) and the respondent Kerala Automobiles Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the company’) had entered into an agreement under which the company had agreed to supply automobiles manufactured by it to the claimant, a foreign national. There is no dispute that they had agreed that disputes between them if any must be resolved by arbitr