https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286547 Where a contract fixed the rate for earthwork under Schedule A, the contractor could not seek a higher amount on the ground that performance was more expensive. The arbitrator had no authority to re-assess the agreed valuation or rewrite the contractual rate, because an arbitral tribunal must give effect to the contract rather than substitute its own pricing judgment. The SC therefore upheld the High Court's interference with the award on Claim 4, holding that the enhanced rate awarded for the priced item went beyond the contract and beyond the arbitrator's authority. en-us Wed, 12 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jul 2024 08:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286547 Where a contract fixed the rate for earthwork under Schedule A, the contractor could not seek a higher amount on the ground that performance was more expensive. The arbitrator had no authority to re-assess the agreed valuation or rewrite the contractual rate, because an arbitral tribunal must give effect to the contract rather than substitute its own pricing judgment. The SC therefore upheld the High Court's interference with the award on Claim 4, holding that the enhanced rate awarded for the priced item went beyond the contract and beyond the arbitrator's authority. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286547