in the case of National Highways Authority of India v. M/s. ITD Cementation India Limited1. Regarding Claim no.2, the learned Single Judge held that the award was a majority decision of the Arbitral Tribunal based on an analysis of the material placed before the Arbitral Tribunal. Therefore, the 1 2008 (100) DRJ 431 Civil Appeal no.4702 of 2023 etc. Page 3 of 15award for Claim no.2 was upheld. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the appellant preferred an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act before a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court. By the impugned judgment, the said appeal has been dismissed. From the impugned judgment, it appears that the submissions made before the Division Bench of Delhi High Court were confined to Claim nos. 1 and 2. By the impugned judgment, the appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the Arbitral Tribunal’s award and the judgments of the High Court, the appellant has preferred the present appeal. At the