“As far as Section 34 is concerned, the position is well-settled by now that the Court does not sit in appeal over the Arbitral Award and may interfere on merits on the limited ground provided under Section 34(2)(b)(ii). Arbitral Awards may not be interfered with if the view taken by the Arbitrator is a possible view based on facts [Associate Builders, (2015) 3 SCC 49; ONGC Ltd., (2003) 5 SCC 705; Hindustan Zinc, (2006) 4 SCC 445; McDermott, (2006) 11 SCC 181]. While interpreting the terms of a contract, the conduct of parties and correspondences exchanged would also be relevant factors and it is within the Arbitrator’s jurisdiction to consider the same [McDermott, (2006) 11 SCC 181; Pure Helium India (P) Ltd., (2003) 8 SCC 593; D.D. Sharma, (2004) 5 SCC 325]. In case an Arbitral Award has been confirmed by the Court under Section 34 and Section 37, this Court must be extremely cautious and slow to disturb such concurrent findings. The Majority Award, as confirmed by the High Court in the exercise of its powers under Sections 34 and 37, is a possible view based upon a reasonable construction of the terms of the agreement and consideration of the material on record. We find no reason to disturb the Majority Award.”
– Hon’ble Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, MMTC Ltd. v. M/s. Vedanta Ltd., [Civil Appeal No. 1862 of 2014].