https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313949 An arbitral award on liquidated damages was sustained because the tribunal took a plausible view of the integrated pipeline contract, the delayed completion context, and the absence of proved loss, and Section 34 review did not permit reappreciation of evidence or interference merely because another view was possible. The Court also noted that the time stipulation had not operated rigidly throughout performance in light of extensions and surrounding circumstances, so no patent illegality or breach of Section 74 was made out. The interest component was, however, modified because the awarded rates were found excessive having regard to the absence of a contractual interest clause and prevailing market rates, and the refund amount was reduced to 12% per annum from 1 January 1998 until payment. en-us Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 May 2024 16:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313949 An arbitral award on liquidated damages was sustained because the tribunal took a plausible view of the integrated pipeline contract, the delayed completion context, and the absence of proved loss, and Section 34 review did not permit reappreciation of evidence or interference merely because another view was possible. The Court also noted that the time stipulation had not operated rigidly throughout performance in light of extensions and surrounding circumstances, so no patent illegality or breach of Section 74 was made out. The interest component was, however, modified because the awarded rates were found excessive having regard to the absence of a contractual interest clause and prevailing market rates, and the refund amount was reduced to 12% per annum from 1 January 1998 until payment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313949