In Brief
A state government challenged an arbitral award in a consultancy contract dispute involving road construction supervisory services. The arbitral tribunal found the contract termination was illegal and lacked due procedure, awarding the consultant over Rs. 2.10 crore. The state argued the tribunal erred in interpreting the contract. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that concurrent findings of fact by the tribunal, first appellate court, and high court are not to be disturbed unless they are perverse or contrary to evidence. The tribunal, as master of evidence, properly evaluated the materials and the court would not re-examine factual findings like a reviewing court."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.