https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184666 Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, judicial interference with an arbitral award is confined to misconduct, jurisdictional excess, or an error of law apparent on the face of the award, and a court cannot replace a reasonably possible contractual construction with its own view. An award may be sustained where the arbitrator acts within the reference and the contract permits the interpretation adopted, including claims for extra cost on procurement from distant sources where the dispute covers the relevant quantities. By contrast, relief granted in disregard of express contractual clauses, such as claims barred by specific provisions on rock classification or site restrictions, is vulnerable as beyond jurisdiction. en-us Mon, 15 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Jul 2016 17:48:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184666 Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, judicial interference with an arbitral award is confined to misconduct, jurisdictional excess, or an error of law apparent on the face of the award, and a court cannot replace a reasonably possible contractual construction with its own view. An award may be sustained where the arbitrator acts within the reference and the contract permits the interpretation adopted, including claims for extra cost on procurement from distant sources where the dispute covers the relevant quantities. By contrast, relief granted in disregard of express contractual clauses, such as claims barred by specific provisions on rock classification or site restrictions, is vulnerable as beyond jurisdiction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 15 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184666