The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of judicial intervention under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the equitable discretionary nature of specific performance.

(Prayer: Original Petition filed under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act 26 of 1996) to set aside the award dated 22.07.2008 passed by the fourth respondent herein.)

1. This original petition (hereinafter 'OP' for brevity) has been filed under Section 34 of 'The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996' (' A & C Act' for brevity) assailing an award dated 22.07.2008 made by an Arbitral Tribunal constituted by a sole Arbitrator appointed by then Hon'ble Chief Justice of this Court vide order dated 20.11.2007 in O.P.No.159 of 2007 under Section 11 of A & C Act.

2. To be noted, Section 34 of A & C Act, which deals with proceedings for setting aside an arbitral award refers to such a proceeding as an 'application', but such proceedings initiated in this Court are given the nomenclature 'Original Petition' by the Registry in this Court and therefore, I am referring to the instant proceedings under Section 34 of A & C Act as 'OP' for the sake of convenience and clarity.

3. Considering that this is a OP under Section 34 of A & C Act, it will suffice to give a thumbnail sketch of facts, which gives a panoramic overview of the factual matrix. This is done under the caption 'Factual Matrix in a Nutshell'.

4. Factual Matrix in a Nutshell:

4(i) Subject matter of instant OP is vacant agricultural lands admeasuring 4.5 acres in all, which shall hereinafter be referred to as 'said property' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity. Said property, is described as two items of properties. Item No.1 ad-measuring 2.66 acres stands in the name of second respondent in instant OP i.e., Mr.AR Kumar. Item No.2 admeasuring 1.84 acres stands in the name of third respondent in instant OP i.e., Mr.AR.Thirumurthy. Details of Item Nos.1 and 2 of the properties as can be culled out from the claim petition is as follows:

'Item No.1 Property belongs to Mr. A R Kumar

All the piece and parcel of vacant agricultural lands situated in No.66, Manapakkam Village, Kundrathur Panchayat Union, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District comprised in the following Survey Nos. measuring 2.66 Acres:-

Sl.No.	Survey No.	Extent (In Acres)
1.	300/1	0.66
2.	300/2	0.90
3.	301	0.08
4.	314	0.64
5.	372/2	0.38
	Total	2.66

situated within the Sub-Registration District of Saidapet and Registration District of Chennai South.

Item No.2 Property belongs to Mr. A R Thirumuthy

All the piece and parcel of vacant agricultural lands situated in No.66, Manapakkam Village, Kundrathur Panchayat Union, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District comprised in the following Survey Nos. measuring 1.86 Acres:-

Sl.No.	Survey No.	Extent (In Acres)
1.	295	0.46
2.	295/2	0.32
3.	296	0.09
4.	297	0.71
5.	298	0.10
6.	299	0.16
	Total	1.84

situated within the Sub-Registration District of Saidapet and Registration District of Chennai South.

4(ii) Third respondent AR.Thirumurthy died pending instant OP and his legal heirs, namely wife, two daughters and mother have been brought on record as Respondents 5 to 8. To be noted, Respondent No.1 Mr.M.Arumugam is father of respondents 2 and 3. Sole Arbitrator, who constituted the Arbitral Tribunal, has been arrayed as fourth respondent.

4(iii) It is not in dispute that Respondents 2 and 3 entered into an agreement for sale of said property with the petitioner, which is a company registered under the Companies Act in India. Petitioner company goes by the name 'Macro Marvel Projects Limited' ('MMPL' for brevity). Therefore, the petitioner in the instant OP is a juristic person. Narrative thus far has also set out the array of parties in the instant OP. In other words, narrative thus far has also explained the array of parties in instant OP, i.e., a sole petitioner and eight respondents.

4(iv) It is not in dispute that R