https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237071 A section 34 challenge to an arbitral award was rejected because the arbitrator had considered the contract, pleadings, correspondence, trade usage and evidence on risk-purchase damages, and no reappreciation of facts was permissible where some evidence supported the findings. The court also treated the seller's written communication asking the buyer to consider alternative sourcing as a waiver of the contractual notice requirement for risk purchase, inferred from conduct and contemporaneous correspondence. Post-award interest was not interfered with, as the arbitrator had adopted a commercial pre-award interest approach in an international dollar-denominated contract and had not granted the later interest sought. en-us Mon, 01 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Sep 2013 11:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237071 A section 34 challenge to an arbitral award was rejected because the arbitrator had considered the contract, pleadings, correspondence, trade usage and evidence on risk-purchase damages, and no reappreciation of facts was permissible where some evidence supported the findings. The court also treated the seller's written communication asking the buyer to consider alternative sourcing as a waiver of the contractual notice requirement for risk purchase, inferred from conduct and contemporaneous correspondence. Post-award interest was not interfered with, as the arbitrator had adopted a commercial pre-award interest approach in an international dollar-denominated contract and had not granted the later interest sought. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 01 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237071