https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287521 The arbitral award was upheld because the tribunal's reconstitution after remittal was consistent with the parties' contract and the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry rules. The court treated the respondent's typed filing as a compilation of arguments from existing pleadings, so no separate opportunity to reply was required. It also held that the agreed arbitral procedure did not give an unfettered right of cross-examination, and the proposed questions were largely argumentative, irrelevant, or already covered by the record. In a contractual arbitration, the agreed private procedure prevailed over a broad natural justice objection, and no legal misconduct was established; the challenge to set aside the award therefore failed. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 1956 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:38:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287521 The arbitral award was upheld because the tribunal's reconstitution after remittal was consistent with the parties' contract and the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry rules. The court treated the respondent's typed filing as a compilation of arguments from existing pleadings, so no separate opportunity to reply was required. It also held that the agreed arbitral procedure did not give an unfettered right of cross-examination, and the proposed questions were largely argumentative, irrelevant, or already covered by the record. In a contractual arbitration, the agreed private procedure prevailed over a broad natural justice objection, and no legal misconduct was established; the challenge to set aside the award therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Mar 1956 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287521