As per the case facts, a contractor, after completing repair work, submitted a final bill along with a 'No Claims Certificate'. Despite this, the payment was delayed, prompting the contractor ... to send reminders and eventually submit additional claims under protest. Subsequently, the contractor sought arbitration for these disputes. The matter escalated to the Supreme Court following issues regarding the enforceability of these claims given the initial certificate and the subsequent protest. The question arose whether the High Court was justified in setting aside an arbitration award and judgment when the respondent had agreed to accept a comprehensive settlement sum. Finally, the Supreme Court decided to set aside the High Court's order, but to ensure justice, it directed the appellants to pay a global sum to the respondent. This payment was to be considered a full and final settlement of all claims, effectively molding the relief based on equitable principles rather than strictly adhering to the initial findings