https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198276 A contractual clause requiring a demand for arbitration within 90 days of intimation that the final bill was ready for payment, and extinguishing the contractor's claim on expiry of that period, was held to fall within section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 because it restricted enforcement of contractual rights and discharged the employer from liability. The arbitral award could not be sustained since the arbitrator rejected the claims solely on that unenforceable time-bar without examining the merits. The award was set aside and the dispute remitted for adjudication on merits by the arbitrator or a substitute arbitrator, if necessary. en-us Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Jan 2018 12:27:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198276 A contractual clause requiring a demand for arbitration within 90 days of intimation that the final bill was ready for payment, and extinguishing the contractor's claim on expiry of that period, was held to fall within section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 because it restricted enforcement of contractual rights and discharged the employer from liability. The arbitral award could not be sustained since the arbitrator rejected the claims solely on that unenforceable time-bar without examining the merits. The award was set aside and the dispute remitted for adjudication on merits by the arbitrator or a substitute arbitrator, if necessary. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198276