Supreme Court clarifies award modifications

0
813
Supreme Court clarifies award modifications
LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Whatsapp
Telegram
Copy link

The Supreme Court has held that an arbitrator allowing an application to modify an original award in the exercise of powers under section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, was not sustainable if there was no arithmetical and/or clerical error in the award.

The appellant in the case of Gyan Prakash Arya v Titan Industries Limited had entered into an agreement with the respondent on 9 July 2003. Subsequently, a dispute arose between the parties relating to the recovery of pure gold weighing 3,648.8 grams, which was said to have been in the possession of the appellant.

The respondent invoked the arbitration clause contained in the agreement and Karnataka High Court appointed a retired district judge as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.

You must be a subscribersubscribersubscribersubscriber to read this content, please subscribesubscribesubscribesubscribe today.

For group subscribers, please click here to access.
Interested in group subscription? Please contact us.

你需要登录去解锁本文内容。欢迎注册账号。如果想阅读月刊所有文章,欢迎成为我们的订阅会员成为我们的订阅会员

已有集团订阅,可点击此处继续浏览。
如对集团订阅感兴趣,请联络我们


The dispute digest is compiled by Numen Law Offices, a multidisciplinary law firm based in New Delhi & Mumbai. The authors can be contacted at support@numenlaw.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.

LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Whatsapp
Telegram
Copy link