Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Dismissed as withdrawn."

10. In view of the said order, the petitioner filed an application under Section 33(1) of the said Act for correction, the details of which were mentioned in the application. After hearing both sides, the same was dismissed being without merit with cost by order dated 29th May, 2006. The Arbitral tribunal by its additional award held that there is no computation error, clerical/typographical error or any other error of similar nature in the award on an apparently incorrect premises that no evidence of the cost of acquisition of IPC guide nozzle (like invoices of the company from where the replacement was procured) was filed before the Arbitral tribunal and therefore cost of acquisition could not be allowed due to absence of appropriate evidence.

"33. Correction and interpretation of award; additional award.- (1) Within thirty days from the receipt of the arbitral award, unless another period of time 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;

25. This Section deals with the correction and interpretation of award and additional award. Following types of errors may be corrected - 

             (i)      Computation errors
             (ii)     Clerical errors
             (iii)    Typographical errors
             (iv)     Any other errors of a similar nature occurring
                      in the award.

26. Under the said provision, a party can seek certain correction in computation of errors or clerical errors, in case, it occurs in the award, but the arbitral tribunal has no power to review of merit.

26. The Second error indicates at page 3 of the application is "taking cost of thrust ring at `3,00,000 as against actual cost of `3,49,982.78 resulting in reduction of 49,982.78". It is clearly stated in paragraph 95 of the Award that on account of Thrust Rings the respondents have recovered a sum of `3,49,982.78 from the Claimants. This fact is not disputed by the Respondent/Applicant. Out of the aforesaid sum of `3,49,982.78 the Claimant has claimed a refund of only `3,00,000. The said claim of the claimant has been rejected. Thus, the amount of `3,49,982.78 which had already been recovered by the respondents remained with the respondents. Thus, we do not find any computation error, any clerical or typographical error or any other error of a similar nature in the Award. In any case, the Respondent/Applicant did not press this issue during the hearing.