https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793835 An arbitral award was found vulnerable where it extended accidental damage cover despite non-compliance with the contract's twin conditions of timely premium payment and furnishing product details. Treating mobile phones and laptops as covered on terms different from the agreement was treated as rewriting the contract and amounted to patent illegality. The award was also attacked for lack of evidentiary support and for failing to give reasons for quantifying the claims, because invoices, repair papers and an expert report did not establish accidental damage or a rational basis for deductions. The Section 34 petition succeeded and the award was set aside. en-us Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jun 2026 08:27:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793835 An arbitral award was found vulnerable where it extended accidental damage cover despite non-compliance with the contract's twin conditions of timely premium payment and furnishing product details. Treating mobile phones and laptops as covered on terms different from the agreement was treated as rewriting the contract and amounted to patent illegality. The award was also attacked for lack of evidentiary support and for failing to give reasons for quantifying the claims, because invoices, repair papers and an expert report did not establish accidental damage or a rational basis for deductions. The Section 34 petition succeeded and the award was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793835