ORDER : Alok Sharma, J. 1. This misc. application filed under Section 151 CPC seeks clarification/modification of the order dated 22.02.2019 passed by the court in the exercise of its powers under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1996'). 2. Mr. S.S. Hora counsel for the respondents at the outset submitted that the misc. application is absolutely misdirected and not maintainable. He submitted that in the garb of clarification/modification of the order dated 22.02.2019 passed by this court appointing Justice P.P. Naolekar (Retd.) Supreme Court Judge as the sole Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes arising between parties relating to and under the concession agreement dated 12.07.2010, applicant seeks review of the order. He submitted that the Act of 1996 does not confer any power of review on this court. And similarly Section 151 CPC does not attract to final order passed under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996. As has been held by the Apex Court in the case of S.B.P. and Co. Versus Patel Engineering Ltd. And Ors. AIR 2006 SC 450 ). M.S.S. Hora submitted that the only remedy for one aggrieved of an order passed under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996 is that of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) to the Apex Court. 3. Per contra, Mr. Udit Sharma counsel for the applicant however submitted that the misc. application is one for clarification/modification and not for review. He also seeks exercise of the inherent powers of this court and albeit reference to the Section 151 CPC has been made in the misc. application he submitted that even de hors the aforesaid provision all courts have inherent powers to pass order in the interest of justice-during the pendency of a case before the court and event after its final adjudication. 4. Heard. Considered. 5. I am of the considered view that the power of review of the order passed under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996 being absent under the statute, the said power cannot indirectly be exercised by resort to Section 151 CPC or for that matter by invocation of the purported inherent powers of the court otherwise obtaining, to do justice. I am of the considered view that the power of review of the order passed under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996 being absent under the statute, the said power cannot indirectly be exercised by resort to Section 151 CPC or for that matter by invocation of the purported inherent powers of the court otherwise obtaining, to do justice. More so, in the instant case where a whole scale variation of the final order passed by this court on 22.02.2019 has been sought on merits inter alia submitting that as the concession agreement dated 12.07.2010 provides for adjudication of disputes between the parties therein by a Board of Arbitrators, the court while passing the order dated 22.02.2019 erred in appointing a sole Arbitrator. 6. In the facts of the case, Mr. S.S. Hora for the respondent is thus right in submitting that the misc. application is wholly misdirected and not maintainable. I would so hold. 7. The misc. application is accordingly dismissed.