In Brief
A construction company contracted to manufacture and supply bricks under a contract containing an arbitration clause. When a dispute arose over payment, the company appointed a sole arbitrator as permitted by the contract. The contractor challenged the arbitrator's jurisdiction under the Arbitration Act, and when the arbitrator rejected this challenge, challenged it in the High Court via writ petition. The Supreme Court held that while the High Court's writ jurisdiction is constitutional, it should not interfere with arbitration proceedings when statutory remedies exist. The Arbitration Act provides a complete framework, and jurisdictional objections must be raised under Section 34 after the final award, not through writ jurisdiction, except in exceptional circumstances involving remedilessness or bad faith.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.