Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.Sharath Chandran
For the Respondent: Mrs.V.J.Latha, SCGSC

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

1. The case involves a challenge to an arbitral award on the grounds of bias among arbitrators and alleged patent illegality in interpretation of contractual terms (!) (!) .

2. The petitioner contended that bias within the arbitral tribunal compromised its impartiality, violating principles of natural justice and statutory provisions, warranting the setting aside of the award (!) (!) (!) .

3. The arbitral tribunal's interpretation of the measurement unit "per track metre" was found to be unreasonable, deviating from the clear contractual terms, and thus suffering from patent illegality (!) (!) (!) .

4. The tribunal replaced explicit contractual language with an alleged mutual understanding, which was deemed a patent illegality because it disregarded the unambiguous contractual provisions (!) (!) .

5. The award was also challenged due to the involvement of arbitrators who participated in other related proceedings, raising concerns about bias and premeditation, especially since two members of the tribunal had served in similar cases concurrently (!) (!) .

6. The court emphasized that bias of even a single arbitrator taints the entire award, especially when bias is alleged and supported by evidence of preconceived notions or lack of impartial discussion (!) (!) (!) (!) .

7. The principles of natural justice, including the requirement for impartiality and the prohibition against bias, are fundamental and their violation justifies setting aside arbitral awards (!) (!) (!) .

8. The court found that the involvement of arbitrators with a predisposition or bias, particularly those who had acted in other related cases, compromised the integrity of the tribunal and rendered the award liable to be annulled (!) (!) .

9. Ultimately, the court held that the award was tainted by bias and premeditation, violating statutory provisions and principles of natural justice, leading to its annulment (!) (!) .

10. The court ordered the award to be set aside and awarded costs to the petitioner, reinforcing the importance of impartiality and adherence to contractual and legal principles in arbitration proceedings (!) .

Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.