JUDGMENT : R.C. Lahoti, CJI. Leave granted. 2. The learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, vide judgment dated 17.9.2001, found that an award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was made by the Arbitrator without giving notice to the objectors and, therefore, the award dated 14.5.1998 was liable to be set aside. However, the learned Judge did not pass any consequential order. On the mistake being brought to the notice of the Court, the learned Judge vide order dated 8.10.2001 supplied the deficiency in his earlier order and directed that the award be remitted to the Arbitrator for decision afresh. The appellants filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution putting in issue the orders of the learned Additional District Judge and mainly seeking the relief that the matter should not have been sent back to the same arbitrator. 3. We find that at one stage the Court has recorded a finding that the record as to service of notice on the objectors (appellants herein) by the Arbitrator seems to have been manipulated. In view of that finding and in the facts and circumstances of this case, particularly keeping in view the fact that the dispute between the parties relates to specific performance of an alleged agreement to sell, we feel that the matter should have been sent to another Arbitrator and not to the same Arbitrator who had held the earlier proceedings. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that several proceedings have been held by the Arbitrator pursuant to and subsequent to the order of the Court and as the appellants have absented on some of the dates of hearing before the Arbitrator the proceedings on those dates have been held also ex parte. 5. In order to do complete justice between the parties, we dispose of this appeal in terms of the following directions: (i) The matter shall stand restored before the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, who shall after hearing the parties direct the appointment of another independent Arbitrator to continue with the arbitration proceedings. (2) The record of the arbitration proceedings pending before the present Arbitrator shall be transmitted to the Arbitrator now to be appointed by the Court who shall continue with the proceedings from the stage at which the proceedings are at present. (2) The record of the arbitration proceedings pending before the present Arbitrator shall be transmitted to the Arbitrator now to be appointed by the Court who shall continue with the proceedings from the stage at which the proceedings are at present. (3) The appellants shall be at liberty to make an application to the Arbitrator for setting aside the ex parte part of the arbitration proceedings and such application when made shall be decided by the Arbitrator on its own merits. 6. The order dated 8.10.2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, is set aside. The parties through their respective counsel are directed to appear before the Additional District Judge, Delhi, on 25th April, 2005 and seek directions in the light of what has been stated hereinabove. 7. No costs.