Case Note & Summary
Background: The petitioner, Hubli Electricity Supply Company Ltd., a government company, placed two purchase orders with the respondent, M/s. Sharavathy Conductors Company Private Limited, for supply of ACSR conductors. A dispute arose over interest on delayed payments. The respondent approached the Karnataka Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, which acted as Arbitral Authority under the MSMED Act. Conciliation failed and arbitration followed. Facts: The Arbitral Authority initially passed an award on 23.07.2015, granting Rs.10,144 as principal due under P.O.No.1667 and interest as per Section 16 of MSMED Act. The award omitted P.O.No.1218, noting its principal was paid in full. On 18.08.2015, the respondent filed an application under Section 33(1)(a) & (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying for an additional award to include P.O.No.1218. The Arbitral Authority, after hearing both parties, passed the impugned order on 10.02.2016 modifying the award to include P.O.No.1218. Petitioner challenged this order in a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. Legal Issues: The core issue was whether the writ petition was maintainable against an order passed under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, which forms part of the arbitral award, when the statutory remedy under Section 34 was available. Arguments: The petitioner argued that the Arbitral Authority had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order as it amounted to a review, and that the original award had already been challenged under Section 34. The respondent contended that the application under Section 33 was filed within the prescribed period, the order under Section 33 forms part of the arbitral award, and the proper remedy was under Section 34, not a writ petition. Court's Analysis: The court examined Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which allows the Arbitral Tribunal to correct errors, give interpretations, or make additional awards. It noted that under Section 33(2), any order passed under sub-section (1) forms part of the arbitral award. Since the impugned order was passed under Section 33(1), it became an integral part of the award. The court held that recourse against any arbitral award is provided under Section 34 of the Act, and thus the writ petition was not maintainable. Decision: The High Court disposed of the writ petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order by filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It also permitted the petitioner to explain any delay by invoking Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.
Headnote
A) Arbitration - Correction and Additional Award - Section 33, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Maintainability of Writ - The petitioner challenged an order by the MSME Facilitation Council acting as Arbitral Authority which modified an earlier award by including a purchase order that had been omitted. Held that such an order, passed under Section 33(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, forms part of the arbitral award (Section 33(2)), and therefore must be challenged under Section 34, not by way of writ petition. Liberty granted to file Section 34 application with limitation benefit under Section 14 of Limitation Act (Paras 7-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is maintainable against an order passed by the Arbitral Authority under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when such order forms part of the arbitral award and remedy under Section 34 is available
Final Decision
Writ petition disposed of. Petitioner granted liberty to challenge the impugned order under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, with benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act to explain delay.
Law Points
- Arbitral tribunal's power under Section 33 of Arbitration Act to correct errors or make additional award
- order under Section 33 forms part of arbitral award
- challenge to arbitral award must be under Section 34
- writ jurisdiction not available when alternative remedy exists
