https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311685 An arbitral award granting escalation, damages and interest was held vulnerable to interference where the claimant produced no satisfactory evidence to support the quantification. The delay was found to be substantially attributable to the contractor, and the award's damages and higher interest rested on assumptions rather than proof. Applying Section 34 principles, the court treated the award as suffering from patent illegality and perversity, amounting to a public policy violation. The modified award of reduced damages and interest was therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 07 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jan 2024 20:47:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311685 An arbitral award granting escalation, damages and interest was held vulnerable to interference where the claimant produced no satisfactory evidence to support the quantification. The delay was found to be substantially attributable to the contractor, and the award's damages and higher interest rested on assumptions rather than proof. Applying Section 34 principles, the court treated the award as suffering from patent illegality and perversity, amounting to a public policy violation. The modified award of reduced damages and interest was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 07 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311685