https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191119 In a non-speaking arbitral award, judicial interference is limited to the grounds in Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, such as misconduct, excess of jurisdiction, or an error apparent on the face of the award. The arbitrator stated that the pleadings and documentary and oral evidence were considered, and the interpretation of the contract, including the effect of rebate letters and conditional correspondence, was for the arbitrator alone. In the absence of material showing that the relevant documents were ignored or that the contract prohibited adjudication of the claim, the court could not reappraise the evidence or infer non-consideration merely because another view was possible. The award was therefore not liable to be set aside on that ground. en-us Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Jun 2024 17:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191119 In a non-speaking arbitral award, judicial interference is limited to the grounds in Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, such as misconduct, excess of jurisdiction, or an error apparent on the face of the award. The arbitrator stated that the pleadings and documentary and oral evidence were considered, and the interpretation of the contract, including the effect of rebate letters and conditional correspondence, was for the arbitrator alone. In the absence of material showing that the relevant documents were ignored or that the contract prohibited adjudication of the claim, the court could not reappraise the evidence or infer non-consideration merely because another view was possible. The award was therefore not liable to be set aside on that ground. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191119