Chaudhry ( 1 ) THE petitioner was awarded the work for the construction of residential and other buildings under Job Nos. 1, 2 and 3 at Tandur, Andhra Pradesh, by the Cement Corporation of India, vide contract No. CEA/const. /3 (i)/78-252-256 on 25-4-1979. The contract contained an arbitration agreement. Certain disputes arose between the parties in connection with and out of the execution of the said contract. The petitioner invoked the arbitration agreement. In terms of the arbitration agreement the Managing Director of the Cement Corporation of India appointed Shri D. P. Narayan as the sole Arbitrator to decide the disputes between the parties. The Arbitrator entered upon the reference and made his award on 14-1-1984. ( 2 ) IN pursuance of the application under Section 14 and 17 of the petitioner the Arbitrator was directed to file the award as well as the arbitration proceedings in court, which he did. The notice of filing of the award was given to the parties. The petitioner has accepted the award. However, the respondents, Cement Corporation of India has assailed the award and filed objections under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act (being I. A. 6516/ 86 ). It is alleged that the Arbitrator misconducted himself in not looking into the claim of the Cement Corporation of India put forward as counter claim to the tune of Rs. 8,30,501. The Arbitrator did not lake into consideration a sum of Rs. 1,32,109 85 which amount was for preparing the final bill. The Arbitrator failed to look into the terms and conditions of the contract which were the very basis for the disputes referred to him. The Arbitrator did not apply his mind to the claims of the parties. The award being a non- speaking one has also affected the rights of the Corporation. ( 3 ) THE petitioner is contesting the objections filed by respondent No. 1. It is stated in the reply that none of the objections filed by the respondents fall within the ambit of Section 30 of the Arbitration Act. There is no error apparent on the face of the award. The court dealing with an application under Section 30 has not to consider whether the view of the Arbitrator on the evidence is justified or not. The decision of the Arbitrator whether right or wrong is binding on the parties. There is no error apparent on the face of the award. The court dealing with an application under Section 30 has not to consider whether the view of the Arbitrator on the evidence is justified or not. The decision of the Arbitrator whether right or wrong is binding on the parties. The court cannot question its decision as a court of appeal. ( 4 ) ON the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed : 1. Whether the award dated 14-2-1984 is liable to be set aside on the ground mentioned in paragraph 6 of the objection petition ? 2. Relief. Parties were given opportunities to lead evidence by way of affidavits. Affidavits by way of evidence were filed by both the parties. The matter was listed on 12-4-1988 for hearing the objections. On that date none appeared for the respondent No. 1 and the case was adjourned to 10-5-1988. On 10-5-1988 there was no appearance on behalf of the respondeat No- 1. In view of this the objection petition of this respondent No. 1 is dismissed for default. ( 5 ) HOWEVER, I have perused the award. I do not find any error apparent on the face of the award. In view of this the award dated 14-1-1984 is made a rule of the court. Decree may be drawn in terms of the award. The petition is disposed of.