This article has been written by Ms. Suhani Singh, a student studying B.A.LL.B[HONS.] from Teerthanker Mahaveer College of Law and Legal Studies, Moradabad. The author is 3^rd year law student.

Introduction

An alternative to litigation is arbitration. In the case of business-related concerns, it is particularly pertinent and practical. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which was revised in 2015, is the current law that establishes the arbitration regime in India.

An advantageous choice for disputing parties who are seeking a mutual resolution is arbitration. It is a different framework from the typical judicial one used by courts. Arbitration is a method for ensuring non-aggressive and cordial dispute resolution. The arbitrators and the arbitration venue may be mutually agreed upon by the parties.

If the judge feels that the dispute can be handled without the court’s involvement, arbitration may be ordered by the court. Nonetheless, arbitration often takes place as a result of a mutually agreed-upon arbitration clause being added into contracts at the time of signing.

Advantages of choosing arbitration

Due to its various advantages, arbitration is frequently chosen by parties:

• While the arbitration procedure has a deadline for completion, it is a shorter process than litigation.
• Due to the decrease in litigation costs, the process is inexpensive. Costs are reduced since a legal action might continue on for years, which costs both time and money.
• The arbitrators and location are completely up to the parties to determine as they see fit.
• The arbitral award, which represents the arbitrator (final’s) decision, is irrevocable and cannot be challenged. This guarantees the award’s finality.

This article addresses the issue of the aforementioned award being in error. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act contains a particular provision, which will be covered below, for the interpretation and modification of the arbitral award.

Arbitral Award

A matter and decision are decided by the arbitrator(s). There, this judgement is delivered as an arbitral award. An arbitral award is as enforceable and comparable to a judicial judgement. It is crucial to remember that arbitral rulings are irrevocable and cannot be challenged. A party may only set aside the award, which may be done in accordance with Section 34 of the relevant Act.

There are a few requirements that must be met for an arbitral award to be deemed valid.

An arbitral award can be of a non-monetary type, meaning neither side is required to pay any money and the claimant’s whole claim is rejected.

A decision reached by arbitration may be:

• For the payment of money;
• Injunctive remedy; a pronouncement on any issue that will be decided during the arbitration proceedings
• Particular contract performance and for correction; or for
• A deed or other document being set aside or cancelled, etc.
• The components of an arbitral decision

• The recognition must be in writing.
• All of the arbitral tribunal’s members must sign the award.
• The award must include the justification for its decision. 
• The award should include the arbitration’s date and location.
• Each party should receive a copy of the award that has been signed. The arbitrator or the majority of the arbitrators on the tribunal should sign it.

 In some circumstances, an interim award is required and may be given. In order to prevent the parties from suffering as a result of the arbitral tribunal’s errors, Section 33 is crucial. There are two sections in this paragraph:

1. The first portion, which covers sections 1 through 3, offers information on how to modify and interpret an arbitral ruling.

2. A second award may be given, according to the second section of subsections 4 to 7.

• Revision and explanation of the arbitral decision

The post-award process involves the interpretation and correction of an arbitral ruling. The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law’s (UNCITRAL) model legislation serves as the foundation for arbitration law.

The statutory provision that permits revision and interpretation of a judgement is Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Thus, the possibility of human error is crucial. This means that there are instances where an arbitral award contains errors. These errors could be minor clerical mistakes or serious omissions of decisions from the proceedings. These types of mistakes penalize one party. Because the award cannot be appealed once it has been issued, these mistakes are unacceptable.

Both parties would consider the arbitration agreement well-drafted after paying for it and devoting time to it, and they would anticipate that the arbitral ruling would be upheld. A mistake in the award is disheartening since it causes issues with how the award is enforced.

The aforementioned details highlight Section 33’s significance. Similar provisions exist in many other nations to assist parties and correct any errors that may have happened. For instance, the English Arbitration Act 1996, Section 57, states that a tribunal may correct an award “to eliminate any typographical mistake or error originating from an inadvertent slip or omission or clarify or remove any ambiguity in the decision” on its own initiative or at the request of a party.

The request for a correction or interpretation of an award does not, however, reopen the proceedings, which is important to remember. The reasoning and supporting data have previously been confirmed, evaluated, and comprehended. Procedures are not repeated. There is only the arbitral award’s examination. No further hearing will be held.

• Section 33[1] of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Correction and Interpretation of Award; Additional Award

This sub-section states that:

(1) Within thirty days from the receipt of the arbitral award, unless another time period has been agreed upon by the parties:

(a) a party, with notice to the other party, may request the arbitral tribunal to correct any computation errors, any clerical or typographical errors or any other errors of a similar nature occurring in the award;

(b) if so agreed by the parties, a party, with notice to the other party, may request the arbitral tribunal to give an interpretation of a specific point or part of the award.

The filed application is subject to a 30-day limitation period. When 30 days have passed, no side may ask for clarification or interpretation.

It’s also vital to note that one party does not need the other party’s permission to move under Section 33. It is only crucial that the other party is informed if the other party is applying for any such process.

 Clause (a): This clause covers any common human error that could happen when the award was being written. Drafting mistakes are simple to fix. This is a crucial clause because, if overlooked, such mistakes could alter the meaning of the decision and cause issues with its application.

 Computational mistakes are a term used in the legislation. On the surface, it can appear like math and calculation errors are being taken into account.

The language is set up such that the methods used to carry out computations can also be included in the scope of its meaning, though. In this approach, the law’s application may be broadened since computation would no longer be limited to only numbers but could also include the techniques and steps/procedures utilised to arrive at those numbers.

Clause (b) This explanation of an arbitral decision, the only concern that the parties have is that it is uncommon for both parties to disagree with the meaning that the arbitral judgement conveys. If one party accepts and the other does not, it leads to issues.

When both parties are in agreement, it can be used as an interpretation to explain the arbitral award’s precise meaning and improve its enforcement.

Section 33(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act

If the request under section 33(1) is granted, this sub-section establishes a deadline for the arbitral tribunal to issue its interpretation. Within 30 days of receiving the request, the arbitration panel must offer the interpretation. The interpretation is incorporated into the arbitral decision. In this instance, no additional prize is passed.

Section 33(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act

This subsection makes it clear that interpretation and correction are possible if:

• either the parties ask for it, or
• When errors are found in the categories listed under subclause 1 of Section 33, the arbitral tribunal itself makes the necessary corrections

 Additional Award

Section 33(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, a party may request, with notice to the other party, that the arbitral tribunal render an additional arbitral award with respect to claims made in the arbitration proceedings but left out of the arbitral award within thirty days of receiving it.

The arbitration panel makes an additional award to make up for any lost time when proceedings are postponed. By incorporating the portion of the prize that was missed, the extra award is meant to make up for the error.

The major distinction between an additional reward and a correction/interpretation is that:

• The original award is combined with the revision and interpretation. This is due to the fact that only numerical or clerical adjustments need to be made.
• By virtue of its name, an additional award suggests that another one is given. This prize is separate from the first one.

 In Mcdermott International Ltd. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. (2006), the Supreme Court evaluated the intent and application of subsection (4) and Section 33 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996, and made the following ruling:

In accordance with the following conditions, subsection (4) authorizes the Arbitral Tribunal to issue supplemental arbitral awards with respect to claims previously made to the Tribunal in the arbitration proceedings but overlooked by the Arbitral Tribunal:

• There is no unanimity in opposition to the reference between the parties;
• One of the parties to the reference asks the arbitral tribunal to issue the extra award after notifying the other party to the reference;
• This request must be submitted within 30 days of receiving the arbitral award;
• The arbitral tribunal believes the request is justified in this manner; and
• Further awards are rendered within 60 days of the arbitral tribunal receiving such a request (sub-section 5).

The tribunal may also decide to extend this deadline if it thinks it’s essential based on justifiable circumstances (sub-section 6).

Relation between Section 33 and 34

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996’s Section 34 allows for the annulment of the arbitral ruling.

One might infer from a close reading of both provisions that when a party is dissatisfied with the arbitral award made, they proceed to correct and interpret the award or attempt to obtain another award. The party may, however, feel that these options are insufficient. In certain situations, the parties file a motion to set aside the award, effectively rendering the awarded award invalid.

According to Section 34(3), a request for setting aside of the award cannot be made after three months have passed after the day a request under Section 33 was denied. This is contingent on the court’s pleasure; the court must be persuaded that the application was rejected for reasons that were justifiable.

Conclusion

It is safe to say after carefully reading the material that Section 33 is an essential component of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This is due to the important role it plays in defending the parties’ interests and preventing errors by the arbitral panel. It guarantees procedural openness and assures that no party is harmed as a result of an arbitration tribunal’s errors.

A time limit is imposed on the proceedings to prevent time and money from being wasted, further ensuring that the parties are not exploited. In this manner, the goal of selecting arbitration over conventional dispute resolution procedures is safeguarded.

Resources Uses for Research: –

1. https://en.adgmthomsonreuters.com
2. https://www.lexology.com
3. https://indiankanoon.org
4. https://jusmundi.com
5. https://www.advocatekhoj.com
6. You Tube

Aishwarya Says:

Law students often face problems, which they cannot share with their friends and families. We have started a column on our website Student’s Corner. In this column we are talking to several law students about the challenges that they face. Students who are interested in participating in the same, can fill this Google Form.

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to aishwarya@aishwaryasandeep.com

Join our  Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening