of the 1996 Act, and contravention of the terms of the contract.” (emphasis added) 9. This Court, in the case of UHL Power Company Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh5 held that the jurisdiction of the Court under Section 34 is relatively narrow and the jurisdiction of the Appellate Court under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act is all the more circumscribed. In the light of the limited scope for interference under Section 37 appeal, we will have to deal with the submissions. 10. We have carefully perused the material part of the award of the Arbitral Tribunal and the impugned judgments. For convenience, we refer to the impugned judgment in Civil Appeal no. 4702 of 2023. As can be seen from the impugned judgment, the present appellant confined the challenge only to two issues, which are set out in paragraph 2 of the impugned judgment. “2. Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that there are two aspects, which are required to be examined in the present appeal: i) The allowing