Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Messrs. Raghuvir Cotton Ginning & Pressing Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, challenging an order dated 6 October 2016 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court. The Single Judge had rejected the appellant's Chamber Summons seeking amendments to its Arbitration Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996, to set aside an arbitral award. The main petition was pending final adjudication. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the appeal was not maintainable under Section 37, arguing that only specific grounds mentioned therein are appealable. The appellant relied on the Supreme Court judgment in State of Maharashtra v. Hindustan Construction Company Limited, which dealt with the aspect of amendment to add additional grounds within the prescribed period in an application under Section 34 or memo of appeal under Section 37. The Supreme Court had observed that incorporation of additional grounds by way of amendment does not tantamount to filing a fresh application in all situations and circumstances. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, consisting of Justice Anoop V. Mohta and Justice P.R. Bora, after hearing both sides, allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and permitted the appellant to carry out the amendments as sought. The court held that the amendment was within the limitation period and did not constitute a fresh application. The court also directed that the amendment be carried out within two weeks and that the respondent may file an additional affidavit in reply within four weeks. The main arbitration petition was to be listed for hearing in due course.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Amendment of Petition under Section 34 - Addition of Grounds - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 34 - The court considered whether incorporation of additional grounds by way of amendment in an application under Section 34 tantamounts to filing a fresh application. Relying on State of Maharashtra v. Hindustan Construction Company Limited, the court held that if the amendment is within the limitation period, it does not constitute a fresh application and is permissible. The appeal against rejection of such amendment is maintainable under Section 37. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an amendment to add additional grounds in a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, filed within the prescribed period, amounts to filing a fresh application and is therefore impermissible.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned order dated 6 October 2016 set aside. Appellant permitted to carry out amendments as sought. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks. Respondent may file additional affidavit in reply within four weeks. Main Arbitration Petition to be listed for hearing in due course.
Law Points
- Amendment of arbitration petition under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996 is permissible if filed within limitation period
- addition of grounds does not amount to fresh application
- Section 37 appeal maintainable against order rejecting amendment
