https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755074 Section 34 interference with an arbitral award is confined to patent illegality or perversity going to the root of the matter; a court cannot reappreciate evidence or replace a plausible contractual interpretation adopted by the tribunal. Where the tribunal considered the contracts, parties' conduct, delays and documentary material, no perversity was shown and the award was not disturbed. Objections based on unstamped or under-stamped contracts and on an incorrect GST reference did not by themselves invalidate the award, as the contracts had been acted upon and no material illegality causing prejudice was established. The award was therefore upheld within the limited scope of Section 34 review. en-us Tue, 04 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jul 2024 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755074 Section 34 interference with an arbitral award is confined to patent illegality or perversity going to the root of the matter; a court cannot reappreciate evidence or replace a plausible contractual interpretation adopted by the tribunal. Where the tribunal considered the contracts, parties' conduct, delays and documentary material, no perversity was shown and the award was not disturbed. Objections based on unstamped or under-stamped contracts and on an incorrect GST reference did not by themselves invalidate the award, as the contracts had been acted upon and no material illegality causing prejudice was established. The award was therefore upheld within the limited scope of Section 34 review. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755074