PRATEEK JALAN,J. - (1.) By the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"], the petitioner seeks setting aside of an award dated 09.09.2014, rendered by a sole arbitrator [hereinafter referred to as "the award"]. FACTS
(2.) The petitioner and the respondent were parties to a dealership agreement dated 27.06.1994 under which the petitioner was running a retail outlet for petrol, diesel, motor oils, greases, and other such products. The term of the agreement was fifteen years.
(3.) The controversy between the parties, which gave rise to arbitration proceedings, concerns a sample of motor spirit ["MS"] taken from the petitioners retail outlet on 22.01.2009. The inspection of MS at the retail outlet of the petitioner is stated to have failed in the mobile lab test report, although the sample of High Speed Diesel ["HSD"] was found to meet with specifications. Depot samples ["supply location sample"], alongwith a Tank Truck Retention Sample ["TT Sample"] and Retail Outlet Sample ["RO Sample"] were sent by the respondent to its laboratory, and received on 24.01.2009. The laboratory report dated 25.02.2009, in respect of the MS depot sample received, reveals that the samples taken from the supply location and the tank truck were not tested, as they were reported to be "leaky". However, it was reported that the sample taken from the retail outlet failed to meet specifications. The respondent thereafter appears to have submitted another depot sample of MS to its laboratory on 30.01.2009. According to the petitioner, this was done unilaterally by the respondent without any information or notice to the petitioner. The report dated 28.04.2009, in respect of the MS sample received on 31.01.2009, found the sample to meet specifications.;