As per case facts, an Arbitration Petition challenged an Arbitral Award which dismissed the Petitioner's claim that a land transfer MOU was subsisting. The MOU between Jolly Brothers (Petitioner) and ... Jollys (Respondents) involved surrendering land. An external party, Jaycee, obtained an injunction against the surrender. The MOU had a termination clause for such an event and a completion deadline. Parties extended the deadline for years, but due to the ongoing injunction, the Jollys terminated the MOU. The Petitioner sought specific performance and damages. The question arose whether the Arbitral Tribunal's interpretation of the MOU, specifically the injunction's impact and the termination right, was perverse. Finally, the High Court found the Tribunal's interpretation reasonable, affirming that the MOU allowed termination upon injunction, rejecting the claim that only a permanent injunction would suffice. The Court dismissed the Petition, finding the award logical and unimpeachable.