 journey has travelled all the times. these are different aspects only. so that one can also understand what are the skillsets required along with the various aspects, the discussions regarding the emerging trends would mean that all the judgments are there and those who have been connected Not as such. गता, वो ज़ोल यह आप दูँः्यी च्छाएिनवीग कुर आप परे छद्वारिठ़िएँ, वो और और तो रहागा गद क्छाएिनवीग क्छाएिनवीग कुर वीग कुर, वो से रण चरिग él सितबाँ करज Nobody यल्ग from this platform So, today's topic is a very interesting as well as useful topic with respect to the arbitration practice. political practice. See, all of us know that how we have traveled from बस्खिरनाम स्धनिस्ट्रीण आप जुग. वहँ स्वावजी सर्द गैजरदूद अप आप जुग। वहँ सजनार मैं मैं ने. वहँ मैं में शूवाप सच्वादूदूद. अप वहदो स्वेडिक्न कॉने आप घ्रीठ कनाम्मादूदूद. दिल हरदी मेंज़ कोग्यातいて, ल KIRBY दनाहीakov ग़ुत ठ् autoritional law is the most important law for the economy. तब और हosp Doesn किठूल मेचाच कोग्याताउoriented from the case Navratriientras from the事 also covered by the invitation. ज� planet आम आत् Ноगे अस गलघ अनकित कोग्याता। ककाभwoo flowers aur commercial contractsई from the requests of farce shop fatigue. प्रुढ़ लग, बनन्तश़ मिले, अजिक्छाझाspotisiously आखूड़़ है आप तुद श्जाचाश नहीं चलौग, जी विज़ास बरुजानाश ब्टिक्छाटर दुज़़्ाशयचाचाचचाचाचचाच्चचाचच्चचाचचचाचच्चौचचेच्चचि आप शबा लिग at the time, there was not much of institutional arbitration so emulate it लिँ लिएग ऎशुली खाड़ान शवीगी आप जाएई मितलेगाई. लिएग नीवाश्टें धौमाई और वहिदेग लिएदीगी वहिदेगाई. म आँ x , त फ़ादतínों की नेस का एक हैं नहीं. औरग धेूए सुपस्रीेम कोपी आब ख़ातचेंनी. शवतृनकोतनय जグ आप ठचमान की य है यना अप्लो ज़ाय रभातांよ.- is constructed into a arbitration center and there we have seen those rules of Singapore International Krankenhgereis Center and when we examined both those rules and we came back and we discussed with our then Chief Justice Gordon Constituted a committee to examine तो अगो। ब्टिय्डियानचान सेंटम क्या अनकशन्के हिटेर्फारूद रोझ, � cannon cheese app tho in 2009 Guide. ररीट्यरिट्यान्चान सेंटााः, ऑी अठ़र्नते ष्डकों कुदी गही room. सो manera besatmême instrumentation. शुहाप Tammy् कि वो आठि दोलस नारग fairey al almost ripi naar kar. तो बौगलाथ से योंक्टील, को ama तो औोकदाइक मैं, अनादुस किंकै मैं, को रेकागागाग्र योंग amplified, को रेकागागागागागागागाग goshh7,ि योंग के चुब बहलीना है. हल की ग сторон, पर चा Wahler, वबसको Braat, भी तम थान होक ठृःचते कि सचारसे ज़नादि landongon, वाम मेंं ज़ियनेरनान कर तेरी खबि юतरच अ� picturedस्तेरम आठा धान तोछ़े। � एशव आओजनादि सचारसे ऱीझा वि मनلم ल मगनसा आप उनन ग़्ँर काई फिर�matesी स puncheshaga lakeha krίνohi kaa foil치ya av. then he has to also give a declaration and in terms of Section number 12. 12 of the arbitration and Consolation Act and also the schedule which gives the requirements for the impartiality of an arbitrate. So this is a major change which is brought about by the law, this is a major change which is brought about by the law unsere respect to the time limit of the arbitration. It is also the arbitration that has to declare us. Why You have to declare it 對way that how many arbitration he is doing presently. am I saying sonkayar. स Landesregierung परच्यरी सहणस के नहीं होगरूखगू wearing, दिएगा ही आन्ए देख्तताः मागग ही। तो सत्पाचाएन ज� Centre & प्रच्यरी। �奶 से सकानना कि आ pioneers ढनानेловै फ nightmares लौब, आकी टिर्रीच्टुष Pretty 먼저 N Now Cajlite. थो वह तोămद्व of the team app , यी आप व्लीती सेदवारती से वहाँ उगाप़्तीच को सब आप येड़ों त। तो सब आप आप याप व्लीतीच येड़ों और गीईघ़ में आप यीईद़ों भी सिघ़रे चीएज्जतारे शी है, आप during and now the in all cases the impartial are being appointed so now the so far as the power of the party to nominate the arbiters concerned. It is only les races where the arbiters clause provides for appointment of three arbiters, only to be appointed by each party and the outstanding arbitrator to be appointed नहीं करे खान्ग़ेखां करे जों तुरूब वो जिदम का सॉयों बोजोँ सुईटूस्ती आस्वाझ़ाना औंगी तुरूब वो गराप्तिजिनि मेगग़्िशांत। पर रभ रब औस्ब ही रलीग्चा today, in the last few years, the changes that we have seen in the legislative changes as well as by the judicial cross-men are a major change. �vision.. आज भी उस्वाज भाज आज पुजTH आज भी आज जवाज भी यह जवाज यह सभग़क़्त्त मैंगईali औरत्बनावे औरत्बनावे था लग यह होग के वह ठालीग. आज भी यह जवाज जातियोंगे ने से से लगतियों वो.. । ौ ू ू ू ृ ु ौ ॑ ौ ु चोत मरँल इस ज़्यस्टॐस धौरव बाज्यन आषस्यशन धौरवाई करनेवेच तौधौस से, थे औल सग्र छोग, एसने तौप अपजज्चेंस पररक्णाई करनेवेशधौव मेंट्तिचिन, मुओ कर workers उसकोगे two कर ठही Jo आपका आपका आपका सब आप येगी हेँ नोगि मीदम गता आपका की जजचम आप याँ येगी ईक और दिन ने उरूल आपका आपका आपका left not within much interests are considered components over invoked is explanation one section 34 explanation 1 our 3 my. which is board is in conflict with publicly policy of India if it is in conflict with most basic notionться desktop reality or justice i. तो अप आम। समःतारनम ज़त्मनतरी नोसदी डोफ थी मुरलती रश्दा चीझ सक्द. जो ता वो पुर्टि वेड़टी रश्दाची गरश्वाद दाशी. ۃ ۃ ە BCE ۃ ۚ lata ۃ ۑ ۏ ۙ ۓ ۓ ۰ ۝ ے  concer favourati and justice and the interpretation given was the that if it strikes the conscience of the court, then it can be said to be the against most basic notions of morality or justice. So, question raises, in which case? So question raises, in which facts of case it can be said? And such an interpretation can be given. Now, one very important aspect, before we examine the example of morality or justice is that on one hand the scope of section 34 is very narrow. It is narrow because general rule is that we should not ू 흉 tray and for the ू ू ू ू ू ू भैअ मेंगट्र्ऍे ओधिल्ग मेंड्रा मेर �न्यक Harsh दे है, भीदिका कि है। चोई वेलगया च्राँवाडै ek poorologue. छोए घ्ब ळिए मेड्रा मेंगडर हू ठ thumbnail cultural bhavav. after few years the rent of that property fell down and the adjoining property was available at half of the rent so the bank approached the landlord that look the rents have fallen and the adjoining property are available at half the rent so you either reduce the rent or we will terminate the lease and will vacate and take the adjoining property on rent so the landlord after verifying the position landlord agreed to reduce the rent so from 10 lakh it was reduced to about approximately 5 and a half lakhs and a supplementary lease deed was executed between the parties and the bank started paying the reduced rent after about 2 years or so the landlord demanded again the original rent which was there in the lease deed and to which the bank objected saying that the rent had been reduced and the supplementary lease deed was executed to which the landlord responded saying that he had not agreed for the decrease and so far as the supplementary lease deed is concerned that is unregistered and therefore not enforced so the landlord invoked the arbitration which was and the learned arbitrator held that the supplementary lease deed is unregistered cannot be looked into therefore the bank was held level and the award was passed in favor of the landlord directing the bank to pay the original rent of 10 lakh rupees the objections against that award were filed before the Delhi High Court so in Delhi High Court the stand taken by the landlord was first that he had not agreed to the increase to the decrease of rent and secondly the supplementary lease deed was unregistered so now question here arose that even if the supplementary lease deed is is unregistered but this award is against the morality injustice it pricked the conscience of the court because the landlord is not an honest person he himself had signed that lease deed and there were communications where he had admitted that having signed that signature on the document he had not denied so the court took the view that first of all it appears to be against morality injustice and secondly the landlord has raised false claims in the objections before the High Court for which the action under section 209 of the Indian Penal Code would be warranted at that stage up to that stage the case was before me and thereafter the parties settled the matter but therefore no judgment came in that judgment in that matter now the second case this was the long before this case is I think few years back and and and is not reported but thereafter thereafter the term morality or justice again came up before the Delhi High Court in another case in which another case of Ganesh Benzoplast versus Morgan securities and credits private limited this is reported as 2021 580 Delhi 602 in which they they it was the issue of a loan where the loan was given for a particular period and the agreement contained the clause that if the loan is not paid within the specified time then they then the compound interest of 36% with monthly rest would be level and by that calculation of 36% with monthly rest the 38 lakh rupees which were due and outstanding against an institution loan became 90 crores over a period of time and it became once more than 1000 I think was 1036% so the High Court took the view that this appears to be against most basic notions of morality or justice although the interest at the rate of 36% per annum the borrower were willing to pay simple interest and on that basis also 38 lakh rupees had become approximately 2.5 crore or 3 crore rupees so the court took a prime of shy view in interim application the final objections have not yet been disposed of I think they might be still pending but in an interim application for the which was before the High Court there the High Court took that took that observation and interpreted morality or justice but there are not much case law on this and the term morality or justice is still to be interpreted and examined by the highest court but it is a very important provision which has to be invoked and kindly see one very important aspect when we in a civil court the applet court under the court of civil procedure is not empowered to look into morality there although the powers are very wide powers of the applet court are very wide the applet court sits in jurisdiction over the original judgment and decree and reexamine the entire thing we appreciate the entire evidence but at the same time the applet court is not empowered to look into the morality it is required to look into the legality and there is no specific provision in the court of civil procedure that the applet court can set aside the judgment or decree of a civil court on the ground that it is against most basic notions of morality or justice therefore on one hand whereas the scope of section 34 is very narrow on the other hand there is a very wide gate opened on the back where the court is empowered to set aside an award if it is against the most basic notions of morality or justice and the words most basic notions of morality or justice are not defined anywhere therefore in associate builder the supreme court interpreted that provision and again the interpretation the given is also quite wide that which pricks the conscience of the court which is a very wide connotation and but kindly see as the court of Mahindra bank facts were very clear to my mind in such cases or similar cases where now if we go in court of Mahindra bank if we go by the term legality then the award was perfectly legal because the supplementary his deed by which the rent was reduced cannot be looked into evidence but if you see from the from the morality point of view in landlord who had agreed to reduce the rent who signed the supplementary leased it who acted on supplementary leased the rent a separate the rent for more than two years suddenly after two years turn dishonest and wants to take the benefit of not registration so therefore although his claim may be legal but his claim cannot be certainly be said to be borrowed and it is against the most basic notions of morality or justice so to my mind again since we are discussing emerging trends so this is a trend and we'll have to see how this term is interpreted and acted upon and also applied in future on which there is not much case law so this was a this was a to my mind very important topic which we will see in the coming time how it is looked into and interpreted and applied in the cases so this was one issue I thought I will share on this platform today the second also very important issue which has recently come in the by judicial prospects is the enforcement of an emergency arbitrator so this emergency arbitrator is also a new concept so emergency arbitrator concept is not incorporated in the in the arbitration and consolation act but emergency arbitrator finds place in the rules of the institutional arbitrators in Delhi international arbitration center it provides for emergency arbitrator other domestic rules also I think three or four four institutions in India they also provide for emergency arbitrator and certainly the the international institutions such as Singapore international arbitration center provides for an emergency arbitrator question arises who is an emergency arbitrator and how is that emergency arbitrator be appointed now for example in Singapore international arbitration center now in that case of amazon in which the supreme court has given the judgment on 6th august 2021 by honorable justice Nariman there the agreement provided that in the event of dispute both the sides will appoint one arbitrator each and the two arbitrators will appoint a presiding arbitrator and the arbitration shall be carried out against according to the rules of Singapore international arbitration center now this process never time limits on the appointment also by the parties and thereafter by the two nominated arbitrators now then there is a separate provision that in the case of any emergent relief which a party may claim then any of the parties can approach the arbitration center and the arbitration center upon receipt of the application shall appoint one independent arbitrator from its panel as an emergency arbitrator and that emergency arbitrator shall call for the reply to the state to the interim relief application and after completion of pleadings here the arguments and pass the award within 15 days now kindly see the normal arbitral terminal comprises of 3 arbitrators one to be appointed by each party but so far as emergency arbitrator is concerned it has to be appointed by the institution and that emergency arbitrator has to decide within within 15 days now the act does not define the word emergency arbitrator and the act also does not contain any provision although the prior to the amendment the just the Shri Krishna committee which had which had which was set up and which gave the recommendations had recommended for this to be incorporated by the act but that was not incorporated so in the case of Amazon before Delhi High Court question arose whether emergency arbitrator is an arbitrator within the definition of arbitrator under the act and whether the award of emergency arbitrator is enforceable under the arbitration and cancellation act so this provision was examined and the High Court Delhi High Court took the view that the award that an emergency arbitrator is an arbitrator within the within the purview of the arbitration and cancellation act and the award of an emergency arbitrator is an order under section 17 one of the arbitration and cancellation act as in and is enforceable for this judgment of the High Court was challenged before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court by the judgment of 6th August 21 by Justice Nariman upheld the view of the High Court that the emergency arbitrator is an arbitrator and the award of emergency arbitrator is an order under section 17 one of the arbitration and cancellation act although in that judgment the Supreme Court only decided the question of law and the decision on merits was not examined and later on by a recent judgment of I think few days back few weeks back in this month itself the Supreme Court has demanded back to matter for adjudication on merits but so far as the question of law relating to the validity and enforceability of the award of an emergency arbitrator is concerned that stands by the judgment of the Supreme Court of 6th August and it is a it is a very important development because so many international arbitrations are there where the emergency arbitrator award issue is there and in domestic arbitration also the institutions the Indian institutions also contain the provisions relating to the emergency arbitrator although in the domestic arbitration still this provision has not yet seen been invoked at least to my knowledge so this was a very second aspect which new trend which has emerged in the recent time and it is a it is a very important you can say adjudication by the Supreme Court on this question of law with respect to the emergency arbitrator so this is again one issue which is a recent development but it is an important development especially with respect to the international arbitration which are there now third very important aspect which I would like to today discuss is how to compute you see most of the as we have discussed earlier most of the arbitrations deal with most of the arbitrations that deal with the commercial disputes the disputes between the parties commercial disputes where there is a breach and one of the parties claiming damages so invariably you will find that the breach of agreement and the party is is claiming damages arising out of the breach now and in every such case the question rises how to compute the damages how to calculate the damages so invariably I will just give a very example of a case which I had an opportunity to conduct an arbitration prior to my long before my elevation before a arbitral criminal comprising of three arbitrators out of which two were former judges of the Supreme Court and one former judge of Delhi High Court so there they there was a agreement between the parties for for a period of 20 years to operate to operate a hotel and for 20 years and the and the one of the parties terminated the agreement after one year so the second party claim the damages for the remaining claiming the amount which he would have earned in the remaining 19 years and the case was at the stage when the arbitrators were at the final stage when the arbitrators were considering to award the amount which the which the agreed party would have earned in the remaining 19 years before that that stage when when I was engaged and I look into the matter for the question here is the the most important thing to be seen in in damages is that whenever there is a breach of agreement first of all there is a duty of the other side agreed party to mitigate the losses whatever can be reduced so if if the agreement would have continued for next 19 years more and now the agreement has been terminated so all the employees all the all the consumables all the other things with the other party would have to engage to provide the services they are no more required therefore the parties require to mitigate and that mitigation will bring them substantially bring down that amount to a lower amount that part once we come let's assume it was it was amount was x by mitigation it should come down to at least less than half now let's assume it comes from less than half then also that is not the amount which is which is the loss that is the amount which would have been which would have been the gross accrual of the agreed party and on that gross accrual for getting that gross accrual amount that party was required to invest the time human resource and other things and expenses and so therefore we have to we have to go back and see the balance sheets of that person and so as in that case given case the when we looked into the balance sheets we found that from the balance sheets of that agreed party of the agreed party who was claiming compensation they are they are profit before tax was only 8% or so so question raises if the person would have earned 100 rupees he would have only saved the 8 rupees and the remaining money would have been just spent by him as on on the execution of the contract so therefore loss is not of the gross amount with that party would have would have accrued or earned in 19 years but the losses what is the what is the gross profit before tax rather sorry net profit before tax which the party would have earned from that contract so meaning thereby if it is let's assume the party would have earned 100 rupees if the contract would have continued then by mitigation it will come down to say let's 40 rupees and the not 40 it will come down to 8% which will come down to further about approximately less than less than 4% so in that particular case a claim of 20 crores came down to 12 and a half lakhs by applying all these principles although this preposition which I have discussed appears to be quite simple but in many of the cases before the high court when the awards came before me I found that this principle had neither been invoked nor been applied nor being raised in objection by the objector but it is very important principle so therefore this aspect to my mind is very important in all claims of damages that a person should keep in mind as to how to compute the damages one more very important similar case although it is not an arbitration matter but again the principles which are applied for competition of damages and for competition of damages in civil court or in arbitration they are the same there are no separate you can say earmark for as to which cases what principle will apply so similarly in a one more very very clear example was there that where a person was engaged person was engaged as a he was an engineer he was engaged as a as a expert engineer to provide his services in a building contract for a period of one year but the builder terminated the contract after a month or so being dissatisfied with the services so the expert engineer filed a suit for recovery suit for recovery before the high court in which he claimed the total amount which was mentioned in the contract so when the witness came for cross examination we asked the witness as to how much money he would have spent on the performance of the contract and then how much is the net profit is reflecting in his tax returns and we found that then the after applying the rules of mitigation and after deducting the expenses and after deducting the taking the net profit from the from the returns it came to a very negligible amount therefore this is a very important aspect to my mind although the case came before me on to lay down this principle but but I could not completely hearing of that case therefore there's no judicial pronouncement I could see on this aspect although the the principle of law which appears here is very very simple so these three three aspects are are are very important now one more aspect which again is a recent development is a case where the award the execution of the award was filed against a against a foreign country and the question rose as to whether a foreign country can claim immunity can claim immunity sovereign immunity and second was whether prior consent of the central government is necessary under section 86 three of the court of civil procedure to enforce an award arbitral award against a foreign state on this case also they the high court examined the cases on the on the subject and then after examining all the cases they then the high court in a case of this again 2021 KLA construction technologies private limited versus Embassy of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan 2021 280 BLT 321 in which the Delhi High Court ruled that prior consent of the central government is not necessary under section 86 three of the court of civil procedure to enforce an arbitral award against a foreign state and second the foreign state cannot claim sovereign immunity against enforcement of an arbitral award arising out of the commercial transaction here also the court again went in detail into all the previous case law on the subject and interpreted and he consigned and laid down the ratio that that no sovereign immunity can be claimed by a foreign state on in cases of enforcement of an arbitral award so this is again a recent development and a very important development because the many commercial contracts which are executed by the foreign Embassy is here in both these cases there were two cases where two foreign states were involved first was the Republic of Afghanistan and the second was also a foreign foreign state and the very important question and in fact central government was also called for and the central government took a clear stand that no prior consent of the central government is necessary under section 86 three of the court of civil procedure so these are the recent developments which are of a very important important aspect and the way the arbitration practice and rules and the pronouncements and amendments are moving to my mind the law is developing in a right direction although with respect to the 19 amendment where it provides for the arbitration council with provision has not yet been that council has not yet been framed and there are different views on the with respect to the government control in it and but that will have to be seen when the things come but they are the majority view taken in by the judicial experts is that they that the government control in the formation of that council is not advisable and the arbitration should be left to be an independent institution to grow and to my mind the best thing is that institutional arbitration is is better than the ad hoc arbitration where the things can can move in a right direction and what particularly first of all whenever the parties agree to do the arbitration according to the rules of an institution the important benefit they get is the appointment of an impartial arbitrator by the tribunal otherwise in the case of disagreement in every case the parties have to approach the high court for appointment of the arbitrator so therefore the parties by nominating an institution and agreeing to do the arbitration according to the rules can avoid that one one legal proceedings initiated just for appointment of an arbitrator which also not only involves legal cost but also the also the time frame so I think this is a and one last thing which last thing which again although is not purely on arbitration practice is that where the parties raised false claim and when the matter comes in objection under 34 the court can certainly look into court can certainly invoke 209 and take up the matter where the false claims are raised by the parties because at times the parties raised false claims without impunity without realizing the consequences of raising a false claim under section 209 on which there is a judgment of the Delhi High Court where the principles relating to the false claims have been have been laid down by the high court in the case of HSBD versus NHAI 2016 SCC online Delhi 432 so I think because this is a sufficient coverage we have to the emerging trends of arbitration and the question is that you can only guide to a particular level than the lawyer and the law dwellers with the flux of time it just gives the bird eye view that what can be the missing this is by Sarveshwar Karan therefore your lordship is of the opinion that it is not the contract value but the EBIDA that is the damage that can be claimed with the respective breach it is his question by Sarveshwar there is only one question sorry what is the question will you repeat again he says sir according to you it is not the contract value but the EBIDDA that is the damage that can be the claim with respect to the breach you see on that the section 74 itself is clear contract value can never be claimed as a matter of right you see section 73 of the contract rate says that a party can claim the general damages which were within the knowledge of a person that the person would have would suffer if the contract is breached and if there are some special circumstances which were brought to the notice then even special damages can be claimed and section 74 says that if liquidity damages are mentioned in the contract that in the event of breach that amount will be paid then that amount also a party cannot claim as a matter of right it is the discretion of the court to award the reasonable damages subject to a maximum of that outer limit which is mentioned there that is a separate concept but I am on the example which had given there was no specific amount mentioned in the event of breach let's assume there is a contract of sale of a property where a person says that if you commit breach you will pay double the amount or ten times the amount or let's assume there is a lease agreement and the agreement says that the rent is 10,000 and the lease is for one year but if the tenant continues to occupy more than one year then instead of 10,000 he will pay one lakh ten times so question arises whether that 10 lakh can be claimed answer is that the court has the discretion to award reasonable damages which the landlord would have suffered subject to a maximum of that one lakh so in any case it can never go beyond what is stipulated but the person has to show how much loss he has suffered so therefore in that landlord tenant case the court will like find out what was the market value of the property after one year if the market value of the property was let's assume market rent was instead of 10,000 it was 15,000 per month so court will say alright we will only award you 15,000 so therefore we were not that position itself is clear by 74 today we are not going into that situation at all we are saying even that general damages which are there for computing that general damages one general trend of the parties is to claim the amount which he would have ordinarily suffered so if you apply the test of ordinarily suffered let's assume a person as we had taken that hotel case where a person would have there was a claim of 20 crore on a basic principle that if the contract would have continued the person would have earned 20 crore so come one logical one logical approach can be that alright it is very very fair if in 19 years 20 years 20 crore would have been earned so please give 20 crore but that claim but this preposition does not take care of number one mitigation what about mitigation this is duty of mitigation will take a very simple example so person orders a truck of apples from pishmeet and when the truck comes the person refuses to deliver it so that person can't claim the whole value of the of the apples he has to go back go to the market and sell that and get whatever he wants to get and then he can claim whatever the difference between the contract price and the price at which he sold the material so this is the concept basic concept of mitigation but in the example which we have taken apart from mitigation then the question arises what is the net profit before tax so therefore if the net profit before tax in every transaction by that person was only 8% so therefore it is only 8% which can be claimed not beyond that but this principle is very rarely been invoked therefore my only point of taking up this issue today was that we should be apply these principles we should understand these principles well and invoke in a right perspective to claim the actual damages which can be awarded by the arbitrator thank you Vikas yes sir so the next question is normally Saket says that the supreme court recently has said that with the consent of both the parties the matter has been demanded back to the arbitrator is there any provision for the same and can it be said to be I think it is today's clip I have seen I have not yet read the judgment it is today come in live law or bar and wins sir I did not also examine that because today I was reading more on hijab and specially the kanataka full bench was live on the YouTube just for that clip on the mobile I have not yet gone through the judgment but what you are saying it has come on the clip was circulating so we will have to examine it and then we will discuss that yes and then he says will all the states which follow the but at the same time because without we will discuss the judgment when we go through it but at the same time you see there are many otherwise but for this preposition to my mind it is again a positive development there are many cases where earlier view was that you cannot demand back so the courts were handicapped so therefore now they as the clip says that with the consent you can do it to my mind it is a positive development otherwise you see ultimate aim of whether arbitration or the judicial proceeding is to do complete justice between the parties that is the cardinal principle justice must not only be done but seem to be done if we set aside a ward and then say everything is closed now where is the justice gone sir that is what I am saying the cardinal principle continues therefore this although we will discuss in detail when we see this judgment but on the face of it this is to my mind a very positive and welcome step in the administration of justice ultimate aim is to do justice and if there is a conflict in law and justice the law should bend and justice should prevail not that justice should bend and law should prevail that's true so therefore to my mind for the time being this is sufficient to say it is a very positive welcome step in the development of law relating to arbitration no other law in our country has developed so much as the arbitration law it has totally overhauled in the last one decade one of the version is that the arbitration is so enriching that the best of the brains are coming forth therefore the best of the development of the law is coming forth no that is I agree with you this is a good reason but another reason is that the investors will not come to India unless there is an assurance no I am saying that the eating sections threadbare it is only coming because the best of the brains are applying therefore all over the world this law is developing and the domestic economy and the world economy will rise only with a very strong arbitration system you see if the investor finds that here if he is in the country litigation and he will not get justice expeditiously then the investor will not easily come here therefore it is in our national interest that we have a very strong arbitration system where we give immediate justice that's true and you see how nicely Singapore international arbitration centre has become a hub in a very short time and many of most of the cases there the dispute is between two countries parties in two different countries choose the Singapore as a neutral arbitration place arbitration centre for doing the arbitration so therefore to my mind it is a most important thing to develop it it is the interest of the country also and economy also that's true they say economy thrives on the how much industries chipped in what are the facilities and what are yes thank you everyone those who are watching us live on the facebook, youtube and on this webinar so thank you sir for sharing your knowledge and those who have been connected with us and those who want to have the further updates do connect with us on Friday on fundamentals of interpretation of contracts by Mr. Enel Raja a senior advocate from Madras Bar Association thank you sir once again for sharing your information thank you