In Brief
The Supreme Court upheld arbitral awards from disputes between a highway contractor and NHAI over payment for embankment construction. The key issue was whether embankments made of both soil and pond ash should be measured and paid as a single composite item or as separate components. The Court held that where expert arbitrators reasoned plausibly and consistently with technical specifications and project evidence, courts must not interfere with awards merely because alternative interpretations exist. The Court emphasized the narrow scope of review under the Arbitration Act, the deference due to expert determination, and clarified that dissenting opinions cannot replace majority awards. The appeals were allowed, and interest provisions were modified to simple interest at 12% from award date.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.