https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751826 Section 34 interference with an arbitral award remains narrow: re-appreciation of evidence is impermissible, and interference lies only where illegality goes to the root, the view is impossible, reasons are absent, or vital evidence is ignored. Applying that standard, the HC held that the tribunal had considered the contractual framework, imports, supplies, returns, refunds, and party communications, including the warranty and indemnity clauses. The tribunal's treatment of the proviso to Section 16(1) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, did not justify interference because it was consistent with the express contract and the evidentiary record. The challenge to the award failed. en-us Thu, 18 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Apr 2024 21:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751826 Section 34 interference with an arbitral award remains narrow: re-appreciation of evidence is impermissible, and interference lies only where illegality goes to the root, the view is impossible, reasons are absent, or vital evidence is ignored. Applying that standard, the HC held that the tribunal had considered the contractual framework, imports, supplies, returns, refunds, and party communications, including the warranty and indemnity clauses. The tribunal's treatment of the proviso to Section 16(1) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, did not justify interference because it was consistent with the express contract and the evidentiary record. The challenge to the award failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751826