https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292144 A Section 34 court will not interfere where the arbitral tribunal adopts a plausible interpretation of contractual clauses and, on the evidence, finds fraudulent misrepresentation and a collateral warranty as to energy generation. The tribunal's reliance on the supply agreement, pre-contract material, and witness evidence to treat the generation estimate as genuine and binding was upheld as neither perverse nor patently illegal. The Court also held that an alternate claim under the second part of Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was maintainable on the pleadings and evidence, with no denial of opportunity to the respondent. Compensation was validly limited to the date of the award, and the award could not be enlarged in Section 34 proceedings. en-us Mon, 01 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Dec 2020 10:17:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292144 A Section 34 court will not interfere where the arbitral tribunal adopts a plausible interpretation of contractual clauses and, on the evidence, finds fraudulent misrepresentation and a collateral warranty as to energy generation. The tribunal's reliance on the supply agreement, pre-contract material, and witness evidence to treat the generation estimate as genuine and binding was upheld as neither perverse nor patently illegal. The Court also held that an alternate claim under the second part of Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was maintainable on the pleadings and evidence, with no denial of opportunity to the respondent. Compensation was validly limited to the date of the award, and the award could not be enlarged in Section 34 proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 01 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292144