https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195356 An arbitrator was held competent to award interest for the period after the award until payment or decree, applying the principle governing pendente lite interest. A non-speaking arbitral award could not be set aside by searching the contract or record for an alleged interpretative error; interference was limited to a patent error apparent on the face of the award or a clear excess of jurisdiction. The Court found the contractual clauses relied on were not so clear as to make the arbitrators' construction unsustainable, so the High Court erred in interfering with the award. en-us Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Oct 2017 11:17:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195356 An arbitrator was held competent to award interest for the period after the award until payment or decree, applying the principle governing pendente lite interest. A non-speaking arbitral award could not be set aside by searching the contract or record for an alleged interpretative error; interference was limited to a patent error apparent on the face of the award or a clear excess of jurisdiction. The Court found the contractual clauses relied on were not so clear as to make the arbitrators' construction unsustainable, so the High Court erred in interfering with the award. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195356