Hi Vinayak, thank you for sharing your thoughts. 1. Unequal arbitrator appointment power of the parties has been discussed in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v. HSCC (India) Ltd (26 Nov 2019) where the Supreme Court invalidated unilateral sole arbitrator appointment. Therefore, all the arbitration clauses providing for unilateral appointments of arbitrators can be challenged. 2. Yes, the award may be set aside if there patent illegality as provided under Section 34 (2A). However, this provision shall not be used merely on the ground of erroneous application of the law. This provision's ambit is narrow, and should not be interpreted widely so as to affect the finality of the award under Section 35. Arbitral Awards "cannot" be set aside on merits. ONGC v. Saw Pipes was applied in Phulchand Case and the Supreme Court held that Indian courts can relook at the merits even at the enforcement stage. Importantly, Phulchand case has been overruled by Shri Lal Mahal Case in 2013. In addition to this, 2015 Amendment inserted Explanation 2 under Section 34 which provides that looking into the fundamental policy of Indian law shall not entail "review on the merits of the dispute".

@@ArbitrationLectures hi, 1. yes appointment of such arbitrators can be challenged in the court of law, however, it makes the process cumbersome and prolongated nonetheless. What I was pointing at is that the general practice if a little bit off the book in commercial sectors especially B2C sectors like real states or NBFCs. 2. Lal Mahal case is focused on the enforcement proceeding stage and draws a distinction as to setting aside proceedings and execution proceeding that too in a very narrow context of foreign awards. It does not expressly overrule setting aside proceeding in domestic arbitration on merits under public policy. Therefore there is a major difference in the threshold w.r.t pubic policy in the domestic award and foreign award. Under 34, public policy is to be given wider meaning and so setting aside of award on merit is doable in case of a domestic award. In crux to say an award cannot be set aside on merit would be wrong, as in favorable facts and circumstances it can be. In fact, lal mahal upholds saw pipes and its findings for the purposes of 34.(pr 26)