https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456200 An arbitral award may be interfered with where the tribunal's finding of a change in law is perverse, based on no evidence, or ignores vital contractual and contemporaneous materials. The contract record did not show any pre-existing policy treating royalty as a pass-through cost for tariff purposes, so the change-in-law reasoning was unsustainable. A tribunal also cannot rewrite the bargain by converting a royalty-based agreement into a revenue-sharing model without party consent; doing so exceeds arbitral jurisdiction and violates contractual autonomy. Under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, such patent illegality justifies judicial interference. en-us Wed, 28 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456200 An arbitral award may be interfered with where the tribunal's finding of a change in law is perverse, based on no evidence, or ignores vital contractual and contemporaneous materials. The contract record did not show any pre-existing policy treating royalty as a pass-through cost for tariff purposes, so the change-in-law reasoning was unsustainable. A tribunal also cannot rewrite the bargain by converting a royalty-based agreement into a revenue-sharing model without party consent; doing so exceeds arbitral jurisdiction and violates contractual autonomy. Under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, such patent illegality justifies judicial interference. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 28 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456200