1. The claimant before the learned Arbitrator is the petitioner in the present O.P. He has challenged the award rejecting his prayer to set aside the cancellation of the dealership licence and for consequential compensation. The petitioner contends that the learned Arbitrator failed to consider the terms of the contract, particularly when the test report which was the basis of the termination had not been disclosed as per Clause 8(6) of the order issued under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act. The petitioner submits that the test results were informed to the petitioner only along with the order of termination. Consequently, the termination being violative of the distribution agreement, the award rejecting the prayer of the petitioner is liable to be set aside.

2. It is further submitted that respondents-1 and 2 have not explained as to the non-furnishing of the laboratory report when the cancellation itself rested on the test report. There was no opportunity granted to the petitioner to know the contents of the test report and the test conducted. Consequently, the learned Arbitrator committed an error in rejecting the plea. In this connection, learned counsel p