https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273477 An arbitral award was defended against challenge on three procedural grounds: authority to institute proceedings, use of a photocopy instead of the original hire purchase agreement, and the tribunal's decision to proceed ex parte without a fresh notice. The records showed authority through a general power of attorney, service of arbitration notices, and participation without timely jurisdictional objection, so the claim and proceedings were treated as valid. The absence of the original agreement did not justify interference where the documentary record supported the claim and strict evidence rules did not apply. Repeated defaults and lack of demonstrated prejudice meant the ex parte procedure was not treated as misconduct or a breach of natural justice. en-us Mon, 10 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Jun 2018 17:24:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273477 An arbitral award was defended against challenge on three procedural grounds: authority to institute proceedings, use of a photocopy instead of the original hire purchase agreement, and the tribunal's decision to proceed ex parte without a fresh notice. The records showed authority through a general power of attorney, service of arbitration notices, and participation without timely jurisdictional objection, so the claim and proceedings were treated as valid. The absence of the original agreement did not justify interference where the documentary record supported the claim and strict evidence rules did not apply. Repeated defaults and lack of demonstrated prejudice meant the ex parte procedure was not treated as misconduct or a breach of natural justice. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273477