JUDGMENT

Aftab Alam, J.

1. Leave granted in SLP (C) No. 31068 of 2009 and SLP (C) No. 4648 of 2010.

2. The common question that arises for consideration by the Court in this batch of cases is whether an order, though not appeal able under Section 50 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter "1996 Act"), would nevertheless be subject to appeal under the relevant provision of the Letters Patent of the High Court. In other words even though the Arbitration Act does not envisage or permit an appeal from the order, the party aggrieved by it can still have his way, by-passing the Act and taking recourse to another jurisdiction.

3. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, senior advocate, however, who led the arguments on behalf of the Appellants, would like to frame the question differently. He would ask whether there is any provision in the 1996 Act that can be said to exclude the jurisdiction of the High Court under its Letters Patent either expressly or even impliedly. He would say that the jurisdiction of the High Court under the Letters Patent is an independent jurisdiction and as long as the order qualifies for an appeal under the Letters Patent an appeal from that order would be, undoubted