https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309625 Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, courts should not reappreciate an arbitral award as if sitting in appeal, and interference is confined to recognised grounds. Applying that principle, the award was found substantially supported by the record and not open to wholesale interference, although the lower court's rejection of objections was cursory. On interest, the award of 18% pendente lite interest was considered excessive because arbitral interest must remain reasonable where not clearly barred by contract. The interest component was therefore reduced to 9%, leaving the award otherwise substantially upheld. en-us Wed, 17 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Sep 2023 21:56:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309625 Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, courts should not reappreciate an arbitral award as if sitting in appeal, and interference is confined to recognised grounds. Applying that principle, the award was found substantially supported by the record and not open to wholesale interference, although the lower court's rejection of objections was cursory. On interest, the award of 18% pendente lite interest was considered excessive because arbitral interest must remain reasonable where not clearly barred by contract. The interest component was therefore reduced to 9%, leaving the award otherwise substantially upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 17 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309625