IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1262 of 2008 Date of Decision: 31.1.2008 Housing Board Haryana Petitioner Versus M/s M.K.Jain Builders Private Limited and others Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Shri Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Shri Ashwinie Kumar Bansal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1 By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has laid challenge to order (Annexure P/1) dated 5.1.2008, passed by the Arbitrator, declining his request to stay the proceedings. It is primary contention of the petitioner that as the Arbitrator has shown his mind in earlier similar case, it was incumbent for him to stop the proceedings, till such time objections filed by the petitioner in other case, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act) are decided. We are not convinced with the arguments raised because the petitioner has failed to show, as to how? simply on passing of an order in an earlier case, under similar circumstances, a doubt can be raised regarding independence of the Arbitrator as envisaged under Section 12 of the Act. Civil Writ Petition No.1262 of 2008 Be that as it may, against interim orders passed by the Arbitrator, writ petition is not maintainable. It has been so held by their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.B.P. & Co. v. atel Engineering Ltd. and another, 2005 (3) Arb. L.R. 285 (SC). In above said judgment, it was observed thus:- 44. It is seen that some High Courts have proceeded on the basis that any order passed by an arbitral tribunal during arbitration, would be capable of being challenged under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India. We see no warrant for such an approach. Section 37 makes certain orders of the arbitral tribunal appealable. Under Section 34, the aggrieved party has an avenue for ventilating his grievances against the award including any in- between orders that might have been passed by the arbitral tribunal acting under Section 16 of the Act. The party aggrieved by any order of the arbitral tribunal, unless has a right of appeal under Section 37 of the Act, has to wait until the award is passed by the Tribunal. This appears to be the scheme of the Act. The arbitral tribunal is after all, the creature of a contract between the parties, the arbitration agreement, even though if the occasion arises, the Chief Justice may constitute it based on the contract between the parties. But that would not alter the status of the arbitral tribunal. It will still be a forum chosen by the parties by agreement. We, therefore, disapprove of the stand adopted by some of the High Courts that any order 2 Civil Writ Petition No.1262 of 2008 passed by the arbitral tribunal is capable of being corrected by the High Court under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India. Such an intervention by the High Courts is not permissible. In view of facts of this case, we do not find any reason for interference in the order passed. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge January 31, 2008 (Jaswant Singh) gk Judge 3