https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283932 Judicial interference with an arbitral award under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 is confined to the specific statutory grounds and does not extend to reviewing an arbitrator's discretionary refusal of adjournment. A refusal to grant a further opportunity to lead evidence, especially in a long-pending arbitration after a party failed to appear on the fixed date, does not by itself amount to misconduct, improper procurement, or invalidity of the award. The High Court was therefore not justified in setting aside the award on that ground, and the award was to be restored. en-us Thu, 09 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2019 17:03:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283932 Judicial interference with an arbitral award under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 is confined to the specific statutory grounds and does not extend to reviewing an arbitrator's discretionary refusal of adjournment. A refusal to grant a further opportunity to lead evidence, especially in a long-pending arbitration after a party failed to appear on the fixed date, does not by itself amount to misconduct, improper procurement, or invalidity of the award. The High Court was therefore not justified in setting aside the award on that ground, and the award was to be restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 09 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283932