https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296070 The Supreme Court held that the contract was not void ab initio and enforceable despite the arbitrator's decision. The Court disagreed with the arbitrator's reasoning based on a government letter and deemed it against public policy. Respondent No. 2 was found to have discharged the Appellant from obligations by not supplying fruits, allowing the Appellant to claim breach of contract. The claim of impossibility of performance due to fruit supply shortage was rejected. The Court set aside the arbitrator's award and remitted the matter for further consideration in line with its judgment. en-us Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Jul 2021 16:51:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296070 The Supreme Court held that the contract was not void ab initio and enforceable despite the arbitrator's decision. The Court disagreed with the arbitrator's reasoning based on a government letter and deemed it against public policy. Respondent No. 2 was found to have discharged the Appellant from obligations by not supplying fruits, allowing the Appellant to claim breach of contract. The claim of impossibility of performance due to fruit supply shortage was rejected. The Court set aside the arbitrator's award and remitted the matter for further consideration in line with its judgment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296070