Arbitrator appointment upheld where no serious objection was raised and the reference had already commenced.

Appointment of an arbitrator for inter-linked contractual claims was challenged under Article 136, but the Court found no basis to interfere. The District Judge had appointed a retired Additional Chief Engineer in line with the High Court's direction, the appellant raised no serious objection to his continuance, and the arbitrator had already entered upon the reference. On those facts, the Court upheld the appointment and declined to disturb the High Court's order confirming it.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appointment of the arbitrator confirmed by the High Court required interference in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The dispute concerned the choice of arbitrator for adjudication of inter-linked contractual claims. The Court noted that the District Judge had appointed a retired Additional Chief Engineer in compliance with the High Court's direction, and that the appellant did not raise any serious objection to his continuance. The Court further considered that the arbitrator had already entered upon the reference and that no compelling basis was shown for disturbing the appointment. In these circumstances, the Court found no justification to interfere with the High Court's order confirming the appointment.

Conclusion: The appointment of the arbitrator was upheld and no interference was called for under Article 136.

---