https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306540 Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court declined to interfere with arbitral findings that possession had not been validly offered before the completion certificate, so the contractual consequences did not arise. It also upheld findings on the absence of a tenancy, shortfall in super area, delay compensation, and rejection of counterclaims, since these were based on documentary evidence and contractual interpretation. The court reiterated that it cannot reappreciate evidence or substitute a different factual view merely because another conclusion is possible, and the arbitral award remained undisturbed. en-us Mon, 28 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2023 07:32:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306540 Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court declined to interfere with arbitral findings that possession had not been validly offered before the completion certificate, so the contractual consequences did not arise. It also upheld findings on the absence of a tenancy, shortfall in super area, delay compensation, and rejection of counterclaims, since these were based on documentary evidence and contractual interpretation. The court reiterated that it cannot reappreciate evidence or substitute a different factual view merely because another conclusion is possible, and the arbitral award remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 28 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306540