https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196257 A contractual clause making an authority's decision final only on quantification of compensation, liquidated damages or excess cost does not exclude arbitration on antecedent questions of breach, responsibility for delay or validity of termination; those issues remained arbitrable, and the award on claims 1, 3 and 11 was therefore sustainable. Claims 2, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 were separately decided, so they could not be set aside merely because the counter-claims were remitted, and the award on those claims stood. Escalation under the contract was not barred where the contractor was not responsible for delay and termination was wrongful, so claim 5 was valid. The rejection of counter-claims 1 to 4 was upheld. en-us Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Aug 2023 09:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196257 A contractual clause making an authority's decision final only on quantification of compensation, liquidated damages or excess cost does not exclude arbitration on antecedent questions of breach, responsibility for delay or validity of termination; those issues remained arbitrable, and the award on claims 1, 3 and 11 was therefore sustainable. Claims 2, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 were separately decided, so they could not be set aside merely because the counter-claims were remitted, and the award on those claims stood. Escalation under the contract was not barred where the contractor was not responsible for delay and termination was wrongful, so claim 5 was valid. The rejection of counter-claims 1 to 4 was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196257