Limited Section 37 review of arbitral awards bars reappreciation of evidence and unsupported challenges to termination.

Section 37 interference with an arbitral award remains confined to narrow statutory grounds, and the court will not re-appreciate evidence or conduct a fresh review of contractual correspondence and termination issues. The tribunal's reasoned findings on validity of termination, rejection of the counterclaim, and absence of public policy or jurisdictional error were already affirmed under Section 34. As the challenge sought impermissible factual reconsideration and did not disclose perversity within the limited appellate scope, the award was left undisturbed and the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the arbitral award could be interfered with in appeal under Section 37 on the grounds of perversity, improper termination of contract, and alleged failure to consider the contractual clauses.

Analysis: The award had already been upheld by the Commercial Court under Section 34, and the appellate court reiterated that interference with an arbitral award is confined to narrow statutory grounds. The appellant's challenge essentially required re-appreciation of evidence and a fresh evaluation of the contractual correspondence and termination process, which is impermissible in proceedings under Section 37. The record disclosed reasoned findings by the arbitral tribunal on the validity of termination, rejection of the counterclaim, and absence of any circumstance amounting to violation of public policy or jurisdictional error.

Conclusion: The award did not call for interference and the appeal was rejected.

---