https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194407 An arbitral award rejecting a broker's claim for losses from closing out a constituent's open position was challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court noted that the tribunal had considered the agreement, exchange bye-laws and contemporaneous material, and had found on facts that no adequate demand for further margin had been established before the position was squared off. That interpretation of the contractual and regulatory framework was a possible one, and Section 34 did not permit substitution of another view merely because a different construction was possible. The award was therefore left undisturbed. en-us Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Sep 2017 11:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194407 An arbitral award rejecting a broker's claim for losses from closing out a constituent's open position was challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court noted that the tribunal had considered the agreement, exchange bye-laws and contemporaneous material, and had found on facts that no adequate demand for further margin had been established before the position was squared off. That interpretation of the contractual and regulatory framework was a possible one, and Section 34 did not permit substitution of another view merely because a different construction was possible. The award was therefore left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194407