https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157000 The Supreme Court held that the award was not a speaking award and emphasized that without reasons provided by the arbitrator, interference with the award was not permissible. It reiterated that errors apparent on the face of the award could only lead to setting it aside if there was a clear error of law or misconduct by the arbitrator. The Court found that the arbitrator did not exceed his jurisdiction and rejected the High Court's findings of misconduct. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's judgment, and restored the orders of the Sub-Judge, emphasizing the High Court's lack of jurisdiction in substituting its interpretation over that of the arbitrator. en-us Tue, 14 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157000 The Supreme Court held that the award was not a speaking award and emphasized that without reasons provided by the arbitrator, interference with the award was not permissible. It reiterated that errors apparent on the face of the award could only lead to setting it aside if there was a clear error of law or misconduct by the arbitrator. The Court found that the arbitrator did not exceed his jurisdiction and rejected the High Court's findings of misconduct. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's judgment, and restored the orders of the Sub-Judge, emphasizing the High Court's lack of jurisdiction in substituting its interpretation over that of the arbitrator. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 14 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157000