Rajiv Narain Raina, J. - (1.) THIS Court is seized of the issue arising out of disputes lifting of bags of paddy in CWP No. 212 of 2014 which is pending for 17th October, 2014. This revision has been filed against the proceedings dated 10th February, 2014 before the sole Arbitrator by which it has been ordered that the party who has lifted the paddy earlier, as in this case, may also lift the remaining 1200 bags of paddy on the same terms and conditions on which the paddy was lifted earlier. Though silent, the interim order can be traced in its making to Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the Act").
(2.) IN M.D. Army Welfare Housing Organization Vs. Samangal Services Pvt. Ltd.; : AIR 2004 SC 1344, the Supreme Court in Para 58 observed that under Section 17 of the 1996 Act the power of the arbitrator is limited one as it cannot issue any direction which would go beyond the reference or arbitration agreement. Moreover, the interim order under section 17 cannot be addressed to other parties and there is no power with the tribunal to enforce its order. Thus, no power is conferred upon the Arbitral Tribunal to enforce its order nor does it provide for judicial enforcement thereof. The Arbitral Tribunal acting under Section 17 of the Act is held by the Supreme Court to be a toothless Tiger for lack of enforcement machinery of its own. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the interim measures it will have a right to challenge the order taking recourse to Section 37(2)(b) of the Act which provides for appeals against the orders passed under Section 17 of the Act granting or refusing to grant an interim measure.
(3.) WHERE a statutory appeal lies a revision would not lie. Therefore, this petition is held not to be maintainable.;