Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a civil appeal where the Supreme Court appointed Justice S.S. Nijjar as sole arbitrator to resolve disputes between the parties. The arbitrator delivered a final award on 15.02.2021, addressing claims and counter-claims, including the dismissal of an application for amendment of a counter-claim. After the arbitrator's death on 26.03.2021, the respondent, Eastern Coalfields Limited (ECL), filed an application seeking appointment of a new arbitrator to examine issues related to a MECON report mentioned in paragraph 160 of the award and for correction of the award under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 regarding rent computation. The appellant, India Power Corporation Limited (IPCL), opposed the application, arguing that the award was final, paragraph 160 should be read in context, and the remedy was under Section 34, with objections already dismissed by the Delhi High Court. The court analyzed both contentions, finding that paragraph 160 was part of the dismissal of the amendment application and did not leave any issues unresolved. It held that the award was final and the application for appointment of arbitrator was not maintainable. Regarding the Section 33 plea, the court noted it was not raised in the application and was without merit, as the rent computation was as claimed. The court dismissed the application, upholding the finality of the award and rejecting the requests for further arbitration or correction.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Appointment of Arbitrator - Final Award - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The Supreme Court dismissed an application for appointment of a sole arbitrator to examine issues related to a MECON report mentioned in paragraph 160 of the award, as the award was final and had adjudicated all claims and counter-claims. The court held that reading paragraph 160 in isolation was incorrect; it was part of the dismissal of an amendment application, and the remedy lay under Section 34. (Paras 9-10)
B) Arbitration Law - Correction of Award - Section 33 - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The Supreme Court rejected a plea for correction of the award under Section 33 regarding computation of rent, as it was not raised in the application and was meritless. The court noted that the limitation for such correction had stopped running due to court orders, but the plea was not tenable on merits. (Paras 11-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a fresh arbitrator should be appointed to examine issues pertaining to a report mentioned in the award and for correction of the award under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the application, holding that the award was final and had adjudicated all claims, with no need for fresh arbitration, and rejected the Section 33 plea as not raised in the application and without merit.
Law Points
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Section 33
- Section 34
- Final Award
- Appointment of Arbitrator
- Correction of Award
- Limitation
Case Details
Civil Appeal No.9847 of 2014, M.A. No. 20972 of 2021
Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Anupam Lal Das
India Power Corporation Limited
Eastern Coalfields Limited
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Arbitration dispute involving claims and counter-claims between parties over a contract.
Remedy Sought
Respondent-applicant Eastern Coalfields Limited sought appointment of a sole arbitrator to examine issues related to a MECON report and correction of the award under Section 33.
Filing Reason
The respondent-applicant filed the application due to the arbitrator's death and alleged unresolved issues in the award.
Previous Decisions
The Supreme Court allowed Civil Appeal No.9847 of 2014 on 17.10.2014, appointing Justice S.S. Nijjar as sole arbitrator. The arbitrator gave the award on 15.02.2021. Objections under Section 34 were dismissed by the Delhi High Court on 29.10.2021.
Issues
Whether a fresh arbitrator should be appointed to examine issues pertaining to a report mentioned in the award.
Whether correction of the award under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is permissible.
Submissions/Arguments
The respondent-applicant argued for appointment of arbitrator due to unresolved issues in paragraph 160 and for correction under Section 33.
The appellant opposed, stating the award was final, paragraph 160 should be read in context, remedy was under Section 34, and the Section 33 plea was not raised in the application and lacked merit.
Ratio Decidendi
A final award that adjudicates all claims and counter-claims does not leave unresolved issues requiring fresh arbitration; paragraph 160 of the award, when read in context, was part of the dismissal of an amendment application and did not necessitate further adjudication. Correction under Section 33 must be raised in the application and supported on merits; oral submissions during arguments are insufficient.
Judgment Excerpts
“162. In view of the aforesaid conclusions the following award is made: (a) The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant a sum of Rs.24.7256 Crores as WDV. (b) The aforesaid amount shall be paid with interest @9% with effect from 06.10.2016 till payment of the amount. (c) The Claimant shall pay to the Respondent a sum of Rs.18,66,86,521/ (d) The aforesaid amount shall be paid with interest @9% with effect from 06.10.2016 till payment of the amount. (e) All other Claims and CounterClaims are hereby dismissed.”
“Paragraph 160 of the award cannot be read in isolation. It was a part of the award dealing with the “ Application for amendment of counter claim ” filed by respondentECL.”
Procedural History
Civil Appeal No.9847 of 2014 was allowed on 17.10.2014, appointing Justice S.S. Nijjar as sole arbitrator. The arbitrator gave the award on 15.02.2021. The arbitrator died on 26.03.2021. The respondent filed M.A. No. 20972 of 2021 seeking appointment of arbitrator. Objections under Section 34 were dismissed by the Delhi High Court on 29.10.2021. The Supreme Court heard arguments and dismissed the application.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 33, Section 34
