As per case facts, a dispute between Jalandhar Improvement Trust (petitioner) and Shourya Towers Private Limited (respondent) led to arbitration. Despite multiple extensions and warnings, the petitioner failed to file ... its statement of defence and counter-claim within the statutory six-month period and other granted opportunities. The Arbitral Tribunal, invoking Section 25(b) and 23(4) of the Arbitration Act, struck off the petitioner's right to file its defence and dismissed a subsequent recall application, citing delays due to advocate appointment procedures and a change in Chairman. The question arose whether the High Court, under Article 227 of the Constitution, should intervene in the Arbitral Tribunal's procedural orders when the statutory timelines were exceeded and several opportunities were provided. Finally, the High Court held that intervention under Article 227 is reserved for exceptional rarity, patent lack of inherent jurisdiction, or clear bad faith, none of which were found in this case. The Arbitrator acted within jurisdiction, and repeated opportunities were given. Therefore, the Revision Petition was dismissed as not entertainable, though maintainable in principle.