https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108756 An arbitrator is not disqualified for bias unless a fair-minded and informed observer would see a real possibility of bias; a remote or unsubstantiated prior professional connection does not by itself create justifiable doubts, so the challenge failed. Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 does not stay arbitral proceedings against a guarantor merely because the principal debtor is sick, since arbitration is not a suit and section 36 enforcement does not change that character, so the objection failed. A sanctioned rehabilitation scheme did not, on the materials shown, preclude independent recourse against the guarantor, so that contention also failed. The arbitral award was sustained. en-us Thu, 01 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2012 17:14:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108756 An arbitrator is not disqualified for bias unless a fair-minded and informed observer would see a real possibility of bias; a remote or unsubstantiated prior professional connection does not by itself create justifiable doubts, so the challenge failed. Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 does not stay arbitral proceedings against a guarantor merely because the principal debtor is sick, since arbitration is not a suit and section 36 enforcement does not change that character, so the objection failed. A sanctioned rehabilitation scheme did not, on the materials shown, preclude independent recourse against the guarantor, so that contention also failed. The arbitral award was sustained. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 01 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108756