https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287372 A party that participates in arbitration with knowledge of an arbitrator's alleged disqualification, agrees to extension of time, and invites a decision without timely protest is treated as having acquiesced, so the challenge is barred by waiver and delay. The Court also reaffirmed that it will not reappraise evidence or interfere with an award merely because a different view is possible; where the arbitrators act within the reference, rely on the record, and give reasons, alleged misreading of evidence or lump sum damages does not justify setting aside the award absent patent illegality or perversity. Additional interest and an enhanced rate were also refused. en-us Fri, 16 Sep 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Apr 2020 11:08:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287372 A party that participates in arbitration with knowledge of an arbitrator's alleged disqualification, agrees to extension of time, and invites a decision without timely protest is treated as having acquiesced, so the challenge is barred by waiver and delay. The Court also reaffirmed that it will not reappraise evidence or interfere with an award merely because a different view is possible; where the arbitrators act within the reference, rely on the record, and give reasons, alleged misreading of evidence or lump sum damages does not justify setting aside the award absent patent illegality or perversity. Additional interest and an enhanced rate were also refused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Sep 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287372