The court affirmed that arbitral awards may only be set aside under specific grounds stated in Section 34, emphasizing judicial restraint from reevaluating evidence or merits beyond legal provisions.

JUDGMENT :

Challenging the order of dismissal of the arbitration original petition by the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore, filed by the appellant, as against the arbitral award, the present appeal has been filed before this Court.

2. For the sake of convenience, the appellant herein, who was arrayed as the petitioner and the 1^st respondent, who was the 1^st respondent in the original petition will be referred to as appellant and 1^st respondent in this appeal.

3. It is the case of the appellant that pursuant to the tender floated by the appellant for the supply of Special Urea Grade 100 meters cold Drawn SS316L material Code No.7713206772 and 10m Cold Drawn SS316L material Code No.77132068724 of stainless steel seamless pipes, the 1^st respondent submitted its terms of offer with clear stipulation that the materials will have to be imported from Italy with a delivery period of 14 to 16 weeks from the date of receipt of Letter of Intent or purchase order, whichever is earlier. Consequent upon the discussion and correspondences, the 1^st respondent finally accepted on 21.5.1997 to supply the material at the rate of Rs.21.96 Lakhs and the Letter of Intent dated 28.2.1998 was issued by the petitioner accepting the offer made by the 1^st respondent vide purchase order dated 2.3.1998 was issued by mutually agreeing that the supply would be effected within 12 to 16 weeks from the date of Letter of Intent with the supply to be effected before 31.7.1998.

4. It is the further case of the appellant that since the 1^st respondent could not effect the supply as agreed to, extension was sought for, which was granted and after discussion, the supply was restricted to 40 m in each item. Finally on 18.6.2001, the 1^st respondent raised a bill for 40 m in each item and received payments towards the restricted supply. It is the further case of the appellant that after receipt of the bill amount, the 1^st respondent raised a dispute questioning the rejection of quantity of materials to be supply contrary to the terms agreed and sought for payment for the entire 100 m in each item and on repudiation of the said claim by the appellant, the 1^st respondent invoked the arbitration clause in the contract, which resulted in the appointment of arbitrators, one by the appellant and the other by the 1^st respondent and the 3^rd Arbitrator, being the Presiding Arbitrator, being appointed by the nominated Arbitrators.

5. It is the further case of the appellant that before the Arbitral Tribunal, the 1^st respondent, who was the claimant, marked Exs.C-1 to C-55 and the appellant, who was the respondent, marked Exs.R-1 to R-34. Considering the materials placed and upon hearing the parties in extenso, by majority of 2:1, the Tribunal held that a sum of Rs.12,30,626/- with future interest at 7% p.a. on Rs.10,58,594/- being the principal, is payable by the appellant to the 1^st respondent. Aggrieved by the said award, the appellant herein preferred the original petition before the trial court.

6. Framing the necessary issues for consideration, the court below, after considering all the aforesaid submissions and perusing the materials available on record, held that there arises no reason to interfere with the award passed by the Arbitral Tribunal as no ground or legal position is made out to void the award validly passed by the Arbitral Tribunal