https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282170 A challenge to an arbitral award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must comply with the statutory time discipline for re-filing, and a substantial unexplained delay in curing defects will not be condoned. The High Court rejected condonation where the petition had remained defective despite repeated returns and the explanations offered were unconvincing. On merits, a reasoned award based on admitted advance payment, admitted non-supply of the contracted coal, and evidence of higher market procurement was not shown to be perverse or contrary to public policy. Unsupported allegations and non-participation in arbitration did not justify interference under Section 34, so the award was upheld. en-us Wed, 01 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:56:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282170 A challenge to an arbitral award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must comply with the statutory time discipline for re-filing, and a substantial unexplained delay in curing defects will not be condoned. The High Court rejected condonation where the petition had remained defective despite repeated returns and the explanations offered were unconvincing. On merits, a reasoned award based on admitted advance payment, admitted non-supply of the contracted coal, and evidence of higher market procurement was not shown to be perverse or contrary to public policy. Unsupported allegations and non-participation in arbitration did not justify interference under Section 34, so the award was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282170