https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280603 An arbitral tribunal was held to have jurisdiction to distribute agricultural lands as part of a family settlement where the mandate, statement of case, addendum, and valuation materials showed that the lands formed part of the family properties; a section 34 court could not reappreciate that material and substitute its own factual view. Refusal to allow advocate representation did not vitiate the award because both sides were treated equally, the proceedings were conducted informally, and written submissions were permitted, so there was no denial of fair opportunity. Cross objections against adverse findings were maintainable, and limited clerical corrections to the award did not render the tribunal functus officio or invalidate the award. The section 34 order was therefore set aside and the award restored. en-us Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Dec 2019 18:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280603 An arbitral tribunal was held to have jurisdiction to distribute agricultural lands as part of a family settlement where the mandate, statement of case, addendum, and valuation materials showed that the lands formed part of the family properties; a section 34 court could not reappreciate that material and substitute its own factual view. Refusal to allow advocate representation did not vitiate the award because both sides were treated equally, the proceedings were conducted informally, and written submissions were permitted, so there was no denial of fair opportunity. Cross objections against adverse findings were maintainable, and limited clerical corrections to the award did not render the tribunal functus officio or invalidate the award. The section 34 order was therefore set aside and the award restored. Case-Laws Benami Property Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280603