JYOTI THAKUR 2026.07.13 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 12. xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx It must clearly be understood that when a court is applying the “public policy” test to an arbitration award, it JYOTI THAKUR 2026.07.13 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document does not act as a court of appeal and consequently errors of fact cannot be corrected. A possible view by the arbitrator on facts has necessarily to pass muster as the arbitrator is the ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be relied upon when he delivers his arbitral. Thus an award based on little evidence or on evidence which does not measure up in quality of a trained legal mind would not be held to be invalid on this score[1]. Once it is found that the arbitrators approach is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on facts. xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx An arbitral tribunal must decide in accordance with the terms of the contract, but if an arbitrator construes a term of the contract in a reasonable manner, it will not mean that the award can be set aside on this ground. Construction of the terms of a contract is primarily for an arbitrator to decide unless the arbitrator construes the contract in such a way that it could be said to be something that no fair minded or reasonable person could do. It was further held that it has been opined by this court that when it comes to setting aside of an award under the public policy ground, it would mean that the award should shock the conscience of the court and would not include what the court thinks is unjust on the facts of the case seeking to substitute its view for that of the arbitrator to do what it considers to be “justice”. xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxx JYOTI THAKUR 2026.07.13 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Jyoti Thakur JYOTI THAKUR 2026.07.13 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document