As per case facts, Solapur Municipal Corporation (`Municipal Corporation`) contracted the J.V. for a sewerage project. The Municipal Corporation imposed penalties for project delays, terminated the contract, and blacklisted the ... J.V. The J.V. challenged these actions in arbitration, where the Arbitral Tribunal awarded the J.V. a sum, setting aside the penalties, termination, and blacklisting. The Municipal Corporation then filed a Commercial Arbitration Petition challenging this award, arguing perversity in the Arbitral Tribunal's findings. The J.V. had also filed a cross-petition but chose not to press it. The core issue was whether the delay in project execution was attributable to the J.V. or the Municipal Corporation. The question arose whether the Arbitral Tribunal's findings on delay, penalties, contract termination, blacklisting, and damages were perverse or patently illegal, falling within the limited scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Finally, the High Court concluded that the Arbitral Tribunal's findings were well-supported by evidence and not perverse. The Court upheld the setting aside of penalties, contract termination, and blacklisting, finding the delay attributable to the Municipal Corporation. The award of conservative damages for loss of profit was also affirmed. The Court found no grounds to interfere and dismissed the Municipal Corporation's petition.