https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456217 A plausible and reasonable construction of a consultancy contract by an arbitral tribunal will not be disturbed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 merely because another interpretation is possible. The tribunal had read the contract, documents, and parties' conduct to hold that the consultant was required to review already approved design and bid documents, and that view was upheld as a possible one. The Court found no breach of Section 28(3) and no conflict with public policy, because the tribunal remained the primary judge of the evidence. The challenge to the award therefore failed and the Section 34 petition was dismissed without costs. en-us Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 07 Jul 2024 17:35:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456217 A plausible and reasonable construction of a consultancy contract by an arbitral tribunal will not be disturbed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 merely because another interpretation is possible. The tribunal had read the contract, documents, and parties' conduct to hold that the consultant was required to review already approved design and bid documents, and that view was upheld as a possible one. The Court found no breach of Section 28(3) and no conflict with public policy, because the tribunal remained the primary judge of the evidence. The challenge to the award therefore failed and the Section 34 petition was dismissed without costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456217