The Bombay High Court has refused to set aside arbitral awards worth over ₹538 crore granted to the owners of the defunct IPL team Kochi Tuskers Kerala. Justice R.I. Chagla dismissed the BCCI’s objections, stating that courts cannot re-evaluate the evidence or interfere with findings made by the arbitrator. The judgement noted, "The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is very limited. BCCI's endeavour to delve into the merits of the dispute is in teeth of the scope of the grounds contained in Section 34 of the Act. BCCI's dissatisfaction as to the findings rendered in respect of the evidence and/or the merits cannot be a ground to assail the Award." The judgement noted, “The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is very limited. BCCI’s endeavour to delve into the merits of the dispute is in teeth of the scope of the grounds contained in Section 34.” The court held that the arbitrator rightly concluded that BCCI’s termination of the franchise amounted to a “repudiatory breach of contract.” It also rejected BCCI’s argument that awarding both lost profits and wrongful encashment exceeded contractual terms. On the question of a missed guarantee deadline, the court said the arbitrator had evaluated all evidence and found that BCCI had implicitly waived the strict enforcement of that clause. The court stated: “Just because a different view may be possible would not be a ground for interference with the award." It concluded: "Thus, based on these material facts and documents on record, the finding of the learned Arbitrator that BCCI waived the requirement under Clause 8.4 of the KCPL-FA for furnishing of bank guarantee for 2012 season on or before 22nd March, 2011 cannot be faulted." Read also: Suryakumar Yadav Undergoes Treatment, May Miss Bangladesh ODIs Franchise Termination Over Guarantee Row Triggered Long Legal Battle The Kochi Tuskers Kerala franchise was awarded to a consortium led by Rendezvous Sports World in 2010 and later operated by Kochi Cricket Private Limited (KCPL). The team featured in IPL 2011 but was terminated by BCCI that September for failing to furnish a 10% bank guarantee. KCPL argued that delays were due to unresolved ownership issues, lack of stadium clarity, and a reduction in the number of IPL matches. It also claimed that BCCI continued to interact and accept payments for months before abruptly ending the agreement and encashing a prior guarantee from RSW. In 2012, KCPL and RSW initiated arbitration. In 2015, the tribunal awarded ₹384 crore to KCPL and ₹153 crore to RSW, with interest and legal fees. BCCI challenged the award, claiming excess jurisdiction and flawed reasoning. The High Court rejected those claims, reinforcing the arbitrator’s conclusions and the limited role courts play in reviewing arbitral decisions.