As per case facts, a charitable trust (claimant) engaged developers (respondent) for construction work. Disputes arose regarding bill certifications, excess payments, and specific works like steel consumption, construction defects, parapet ... walls, and window types. Both parties challenged the Arbitral Tribunal's award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, citing contractual violations and patent illegality. The question arose whether the Arbitral Tribunal's findings on these various claims and counter claims were valid or suffered from legal infirmities. Finally, the High Court identified fundamental errors in the Tribunal's treatment of subsequent agreements, finding some parts perverse. It concluded that the claims and counter claims were severable, allowing both petitions in part and determining specific entitlements for both the claimant and respondent.