https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248295 An arbitral tribunal's construction of a valuation agreement was upheld where the parties had agreed to market-value assessment by an appointed expert, received the draft report, and were given an opportunity to respond; a section 34 court will not disturb a plausible contractual interpretation or the resulting refusal of cross-examination and further expert evidence. The limitation objection also failed because it was not effectively pressed before the tribunal and the dispute was not treated as a simple accounts claim. Monetary equalisation and possession-based adjustments were likewise sustained because exact partition in specie was impracticable, and owelty was treated as a legitimate means of implementing the parties' and tribunal's mandate. en-us Fri, 08 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Jun 2014 13:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248295 An arbitral tribunal's construction of a valuation agreement was upheld where the parties had agreed to market-value assessment by an appointed expert, received the draft report, and were given an opportunity to respond; a section 34 court will not disturb a plausible contractual interpretation or the resulting refusal of cross-examination and further expert evidence. The limitation objection also failed because it was not effectively pressed before the tribunal and the dispute was not treated as a simple accounts claim. Monetary equalisation and possession-based adjustments were likewise sustained because exact partition in specie was impracticable, and owelty was treated as a legitimate means of implementing the parties' and tribunal's mandate. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 08 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248295