https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108298 Where an arbitration agreement vested procedural control in the arbitrator, directions fixing dates, time and place and repeated communications constituted reasonable notice to enable participation; absent a request for adjournment or proof of specific prejudice, non-attendance did not vitiate the award, so the award stood. Separately, a post hoc request for letters undertaking not to challenge the award, made in a complex family arbitration and not acted upon, did not by itself establish misconduct or nullify the award. Appeals restoring the award were allowed on these grounds. en-us Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Nov 2015 17:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108298 Where an arbitration agreement vested procedural control in the arbitrator, directions fixing dates, time and place and repeated communications constituted reasonable notice to enable participation; absent a request for adjournment or proof of specific prejudice, non-attendance did not vitiate the award, so the award stood. Separately, a post hoc request for letters undertaking not to challenge the award, made in a complex family arbitration and not acted upon, did not by itself establish misconduct or nullify the award. Appeals restoring the award were allowed on these grounds. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108298