Arb. Case 12 of 2007. 23.4.2008 Present: Mr. J.S.Bhogal, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Suneet Goel, counsel for the petitioner. Mr.K.D.Shridhar, counsel for respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner has moved an application under Sections 12 and 13 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as ‘the Act’) before the Arbitrator challenging his impartiality in conducting the arbitration proceedings. A number of allegations have been made in the petition which is filed as also the application moved before the arbitrator. Notice of this application was issued to the parties. The respondents have filed their reply, but the Arbitrator who was also a party and was duly served, has not submitted reply despite service. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made number of submissions that the arbitrator has not acted in accordance with law and that his continuance with the proceedings would cause serious prejudice to the case of the petitioner which would lead to multiplicity of proceedings. He submits that ultimately if a challenge is to be laid to the award under Section 34 of the Act, it would -2- again lead to another round of litigation between the parties which is not the intention of arbitration proceedings as disputes are to be resolved in a shortest possible time. I do not find that the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner are well founded. The Scheme of the Act does not permit interference by Court for the removal of an arbitrator, merely because he rules in a petition for recusal that the submissions of the petitioner are not well founded. A conjoint reading of Sections 12, 13 and 34 of the Act lead to no other conclusion save and except that this aspect can be challenged in a petition under Section 34 of the Act. In these circumstances, I do not find force in the arguments put forth by learned counsel for the petitioner. This petition is accordingly dismissed. It will be open to the petitioner to challenge the award on all grounds available to him under the law including the ground of bias alleged against the arbitrator and its effect on the award. All pending applications shall also stand dismissed. April 23, 2008(PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.