learned single Judge and otherwise, we are having limited jurisdiction while exercising the appellate jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Act of 1996. Accordingly, we are not inclined to cause interference in the order passed by the learned single Judge. It is even for the prayer of the appellant for the remand of case to the learned Arbitrator. The remand of case can be made only when a case is made out. The learned counsel for the appellant was given chance to show pleading or any material forming the basis for the Court to determine the loss of profit, but despite time granted by the Court, pleading or material could not be referred before the Court. Learned counsel for the appellant though submits that when detailed reasonings have been given by the learned Arbitrator holding the termination of the contract to be illegal, the reasonings there may be the basis for determination of the amount of loss of profit. We have considered the aforesaid argument also, but find that there is no discussion of that nature in the award. The learned Arbitrator has not referred to any finding in reference to other issues and more specifically, regarding termination of the agreement to be illegal and there is no pleading or material to make it as the basis for the award of benefit of 15% of the amount of unexecuted value of work towards the loss of profit.
