MODULE : 3

Part I of the Act governs arbitration proceedings where the place of arbitration is in India [2(2)].

1. Composition of the Arbitral Tribunal (Chapter III)

The structure and selection of the arbitral tribunal are crucial for a fair and e ective arbitration process.

Number of Arbitrators (Section 10): Parties have the freedom to determine the number of arbitrators,
provided that such number shall not be an even number [10(1)]. This is to avoid potential deadlocks in
decision-making [10(1)]. Failing such determination by the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall consist of a
sole arbitrator [10(2)].
Example: In a contract dispute, the parties can agree to have a panel of three arbitrators, or a single
arbitrator, depending on the complexity and value of the dispute. If they don't specify, a sole
arbitrator will be appointed.

M.M.I.C. Ltd. V. Sterlite Industries

Facts

M.M.I.C. Ltd. And Sterlite Industries had a contract where each would appoint one arbitrator, and these
two would choose an umpire. Sterlite invoked this clause after the 1996 Arbitration Act. M.M.I.C.
argued the agreement was invalid as it named two arbitrators, against the Act’s rule against even
numbers, and only a lawsuit was possible, not arbitration.

Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled the arbitration agreement was valid. Section 7 of the 1996 Act doesn’t require
a specific number of arbitrators. Section 10, a procedural rule, allows flexibility. The agreement’s
provision for two arbitrators appointing an umpire effectively meant three arbitrators, complying with
Section 10(1). Thus, the agreement was valid and enforceable under the 1996 Act.

Appointment of Arbitrators (Section 11): A person of any nationality can be an arbitrator unless
otherwise agreed by the parties [11(1)]. Subject to certain conditions, parties are free to agree on a
procedure for appointing the arbitrator or arbitrators [11(2)]. If there's no agreement:
In an arbitration with three arbitrators, each party appoints one, and the two appointed
arbitrators appoint the third (presiding arbitrator) [11(3)].
If a party fails to appoint an arbitrator or if the two appointed arbitrators fail to agree on the
third, the appointment can be made by the Court [11(4), 11(5)]. The term "Court" is defined in Section
2(1)(e).
In an arbitration with a sole arbitrator, if the parties fail to agree on the arbitrator, the
appointment shall be made by the Court [11(6)].
Before appointing an arbitrator, the Court shall seek a written disclosure from the prospective
arbitrator regarding any circumstances that might give rise to justifiable doubts as to their independence
or impartiality, as outlined in Section 12(1) and the Fifth Schedule. The Court must have due regard to
this disclosure and any qualifications required by the parties' agreement.
 For international commercial arbitration, the Supreme Court or the person/institution designated by
it generally handles the appointment of sole or third arbitrators [11(9), 36]. In other arbitrations, it is
the High Court within whose local limits the principal Civil Court is situated [11(12)(b), 37, 38].
Applications for the appointment of an arbitrator should be disposed of expeditiously, ideally within
sixty days from the date of service of notice on the opposite party [11(13), 38].
Example: If a contract has an arbitration clause stating that each party will appoint one arbitrator and
the two will appoint a third, but one party fails to appoint their arbitrator within the agreed time, the
other party can approach the Court to make the appointment.

Parsvnath Developers Ltd. V. Rail Land Development Authority,

Facts
In Parsvnath Developers Ltd. V. Rail Land Development Authority, the respondent objected to arbitration
under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, arguing the disputes overlapped with prior arbitrations or
were barred by Order II Rule 2 of the CPC, 1908. They urged the Delhi High Court to examine the
arbitration clause’s validity and the disputes’ nature.

Judgment
The Delhi High Court held that Section 11 limits the court’s role to confirming the existence of an
arbitration clause, not its validity or the disputes’ merits. Objections about overlapping claims or CPC
violations fall under the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction. The court cannot decide these issues, which
must be addressed by the tribunal when raised.

Grounds for Challenge (Section 12): An arbitrator can be challenged only if circumstances exist that give
rise to justifiable doubts as to their independence or impartiality [12(3)(a), 42], or if they do not possess
the qualifications agreed to by the parties [12(3)(b)]. The Fifth Schedule provides a non-exhaustive list of
grounds that give rise to justifiable doubts. A prospective arbitrator must disclose in writing any
circumstances (past or present relationships, interests, etc.) likely to a ect their independence or
impartiality, or their ability to devote sufficient time [12(1), 40, 41] as per the format in the Sixth
Schedule. An arbitrator has a continuing duty to disclose such circumstances without delay throughout
the proceedings [12(2), 42].
Example: If an arbitrator is found to have a past business relationship with one of the parties that was
not disclosed and could reasonably create doubts about their impartiality, the other party can
challenge their appointment.

Challenge Procedure (Section 13): Parties are free to agree on a procedure for challenging an arbitrator
[13(1), 43]. Failing such agreement, a party wanting to challenge must, within fifteen days of becoming
aware of the constitution of the tribunal or the circumstances for challenge, send a written statement of
reasons to the tribunal [13(2), 43, 44]. Unless the challenged arbitrator withdraws or the other party
agrees, the arbitral tribunal itself will decide on the challenge [13(3), 44]. If the challenge is
unsuccessful, the proceedings continue, and the challenging party can raise the issue again in an
application to set aside the award under Section 34 [13(4), 13(5), 44, 45, 98]. The Court setting aside the
award may decide on the arbitrator's fees [13(6), 45].
Example: If a party discovers that the presiding arbitrator is a former employee of the opposing party,
and there is no agreed challenge procedure, they must file a written challenge with the arbitral
tribunal within fifteen days of this discovery.
**SP Singla Constructions Pvt. Ltd. V. State of Himachal Pradesh (2019) 2 SCC 488**

Facts
The issue was whether the appointment of an arbitrator could be challenged via an application under
Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The High Court had addressed this
challenge, prompting review by the Supreme Court regarding the correct procedure.

Judgment
The Supreme Court held that challenges to an arbitrator’s appointment must first be raised before the
arbitrator under Section 13 of the 1996 Act. If unresolved, the issue can be contested in the award
challenge under Section 34. The Court clarified that Section 11(6) applications cannot be used to
challenge an arbitrator’s appointment.

**The Government of Haryana, PWD v. G.F. Toll Road Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 3 SCC 505**

Facts
In The Government of Haryana v. G.F. Toll Road Pvt. Ltd., the dispute involved whether a former
employee could serve as an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The
respondents questioned the former employee’s eligibility, citing potential bias, especially after the
2015 amendments to the Act.

Judgment
The Supreme Court held that the 1996 Act does not disqualify former employees from acting as
arbitrators if there are no justifiable doubts about their independence and impartiality. Even post-
2015 amendments, Entry 1 of the 5th Schedule does not list past employees as disqualified, allowing
them to serve as arbitrators if impartiality is assured.

Failure or Impossibility to Act (Section 14): The mandate of an arbitrator shall terminate if they become
de jure or de facto unable to perform their functions or for other reasons fail to act without undue delay,
and they withdraw from office or the parties agree to the termination [14(1), 45, 46]. Agreement to
terminate does not imply acceptance of the validity of the grounds [14(2), 46].

Termination of Mandate and Substitution of Arbitrator (Section 15): Besides challenge or inability to act,
an arbitrator's mandate can terminate if they withdraw for any reason or by agreement of the parties
[15(1), 46]. A substitute arbitrator is appointed according to the rules that applied to the appointment of
the replaced arbitrator [15(2), 47]. Unless agreed otherwise, prior hearings may be repeated at the
tribunal's discretion [15(3), 47], and prior orders or rulings remain valid solely due to the change in
composition [15(4), 47, 48].
2. Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunals (Chapter IV)
The arbitral tribunal's authority to hear and decide a dispute stems from the arbitration agreement.

Competence of Arbitral Tribunal to Rule on its Jurisdiction (Section 16): The arbitral tribunal has the
competence to rule on its own jurisdiction, including objections regarding the existence or validity of the
arbitration agreement (Kompetenz-Kompetenz)
[16(1), 48]. An arbitration clause within a contract is treated as an agreement independent of the other
terms, and a tribunal's finding that the contract is void does not automatically invalidate the arbitration
clause (separability doctrine) [16(1)(a), 16(1) (b), 48, 49].
A plea that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction must be raised no later than the submission of the
statement of defence [16(2), 49]. A plea that the tribunal is exceeding its scope must be raised as
soon as the matter alleged to be beyond scope is raised [16(3), 49].
The tribunal may admit a later plea if the delay is justified [16(4), 50].
If the tribunal rejects a jurisdictional plea, it continues the proceedings and makes an award. The
aggrieved party can challenge this in an application to set aside the award under Section 34 [16(5),
16(6), 50].
Example: If a party argues that the dispute is not covered by the arbitration agreement, they must
raise this objection in their statement of defence. The arbitral tribunal will then rule on whether it has
jurisdiction to hear the matter.

Interim Measures Ordered by Arbitral Tribunal (Section 17): During arbitral proceedings, a party can
apply to the arbitral tribunal for interim measures of protection, such as preservation of goods, securing
the amount in dispute, detention or inspection of property, interim injunction, or appointment of a
receiver [17(1), 51, 52]. The arbitral tribunal has the same power to make such orders as a court does in
relation to proceedings before it [17(1), 53, 54]. Subject to appeals under Section 37, orders issued by the
tribunal under Section 17 are deemed to be orders of the Court and are enforceable under the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 [17(2), 54, 112, 113].
Example: In a dispute about defective goods, the arbitral tribunal might order the interim custody of
the remaining goods to prevent further deterioration, pending the final award.

**State of Gujarat & Ors. V. Amber Builders, AIR 2020 SC 454**

Facts

In the issue was whether an Arbitral Tribunal under the Gujarat Act could exercise interim relief powers
under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court examined potential
inconsistencies between the two Acts and revisited the precedent set in Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. V.
Union of India

Judgment

The Supreme Court held that there is no inconsistency between the Gujarat Act and Section 17 of the
1996 Act, allowing the Arbitral Tribunal to grant interim relief. The Court declared Gangotri
Enterprises per incuriam, as it relied on the overruled Raman Iron Foundry case, overturned by a
three-judge bench in H.M. Kamaluddin Ansari.
 **[Link] NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail Limited & Ors., AIR 2021 SC 3723**

Facts

In, the dispute centered on whether an Emergency Arbitrator’s interim relief order under Institutional
Rules was enforceable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Questions arose about party
autonomy, the status of such orders under Section 17, and whether enforcement orders under
Section 17(2) could be appealed under Section 37.

Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld party autonomy, allowing parties to choose Institutional Rules, including
Emergency Arbitrators for interim relief. Orders by Emergency Arbitrators are enforceable under
Section 17(1) and (2) of the 1996 Act. The Court further clarified that no appeal lies under Section 37
against enforcement orders under Section 17(2), ensuring their finality.

3. Conduct of Arbitral Proceedings (Chapter V)

This chapter outlines the fundamental principles and procedures governing how arbitration is conducted.

Equal Treatment of Parties (Section 18): Parties must be treated with equality, and each party shall be
given a full opportunity to present their case. This is a cornerstone of natural justice.

Determination of Rules of Procedure (Section 19): The arbitral tribunal is not bound by the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, or the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [19(1), 55]. Subject to Part I, parties are free to agree
on the procedure to be followed [19(2), 55]. Failing such agreement, the arbitral tribunal may conduct
the proceedings in the manner it considers appropriate [19(3), 55]. This includes the power to
determine the admissibility, relevance, materiality, and weight of evidence [19(4), 56].
Example: Parties can agree to have only written submissions or a combination of written and oral
hearings, and they can decide on the rules of evidence to be followed.

Place of Arbitration (Section 20): Parties are free to agree on the place of arbitration [20(1), 56]. Failing
such agreement, the arbitral tribunal determines the place having regard to the circumstances, including
the convenience of the parties [20(2), 56]. Unless otherwise agreed, the tribunal can meet at any place it
considers appropriate for consultation, hearings, or inspection [20(3), 56, 57].

**Sanshin Chemicals Industry v. Oriental Carbons and Chemicals Ltd. & Ors., AIR 2001 SC 1219**
Facts
the dispute involved determining the venue of arbitration when the parties could not agree on a place. The
issue was whether the parties could delegate the decision regarding the arbitration venue to a person or
institution under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Judgment
The Supreme Court held that, under a conjoint reading of Sections 2(6) and 20 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996, if parties fail to agree on the arbitration venue, they can authorize any person or
institution to decide the venue. This ensures flexibility and upholds party autonomy in determining the
place of arbitration.
Commencement of Arbitral Proceedings (Section 21): Unless otherwise agreed, arbitral proceedings
commence on the date on which a request for the dispute to be referred to arbitration is received by the
respondent.

Language (Section 22): Parties are free to agree upon the language(s) to be used [22(1),
57, 58]. Failing such agreement, the arbitral tribunal determines the language(s) [22(2), 58]. The
agreement or determination applies to all written statements, hearings, and the award, unless specified
otherwise [22(3), 58]. The tribunal may order translations of documentary evidence [22(4), 58, 59].

Statements of Claim and Defence (Section 23): Within the agreed or determined time, the claimant
submits their statement of claim (facts, issues, relief sought), and the respondent submits their defence
[23(1), 59]. Parties can submit relevant documents [23(2), 59, 60]. The respondent can also submit a
counterclaim or plead a set-off if it falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement [23(2A), 60].
Amendments or supplements to claims or defences are allowed unless the tribunal considers it
inappropriate due to delay [23(3), 60, 61]. Statements of claim and defence should ideally be completed
within six months from the date the arbitrator(s) receive notice of their appointment [23(4), 61].

Hearings and Written Proceedings (Section 24): Unless agreed otherwise, the arbitral tribunal decides
whether to hold oral hearings for evidence or argument, or to proceed on documents [24(1), 61, 62].
However, the tribunal must hold oral hearings if requested by a party, unless parties have agreed otherwise
[24(1) Proviso, 62]. Oral hearings should be held on a day-to-day basis as far as possible, with adjournments
granted only for sufficient cause, with potential cost implications for unjustified adjournments [24(1) Second
Proviso, 62, 63]. Parties must receive sufficient advance notice of any hearing or inspection [24(2), 63]. All
information and applications by one party must be communicated to the other, including expert reports
[24(3), 63, 64].

Default of a Party (Section 25): Without sufficient cause:

If the claimant fails to communicate their statement of claim, the tribunal terminates the
proceedings [25(a), 64].
If the respondent fails to communicate their statement of defence, the tribunal continues without
treating it as an admission and has discretion to treat the right to file the defence as forfeited [25(b), 64, 65].
If a party fails to appear at a hearing or produce evidence, the tribunal may continue and make the
award on the evidence before it [25(c), 65].

Expert Appointed by Arbitral Tribunal (Section 26): Unless agreed otherwise, the tribunal may appoint
one or more experts to report on specific issues [26(1)(a), 65, 66] and require parties to provide
 necessary information or access to property [26(1)(b), 66]. Unless agreed otherwise, the expert
participates in an oral hearing if requested by a party or considered necessary by the tribunal, allowing
parties to question them and present their own experts [26(2), 66, 67]. The expert must make available
relevant documents or property for examination upon a party's request [26(3), 67].

Court Assistance in Taking Evidence (Section 27): The arbitral tribunal, or a party with the tribunal's
approval, can apply to the Court for assistance in taking evidence [27(1), 67]. The application must specify
details of the parties, claim, and the evidence sought (witnesses, documents, property) [27(2), 68, 69].
The Court, within its competence, can execute the request by ordering evidence to be provided directly to
the tribunal and can issue processes to witnesses as in suits before it [27(3), 27(4), 69]. Failure to comply
with such processes can lead to penalties by order of the Court upon the tribunal's representation [27(5),
69, 70]. "Processes" include summonses and commissions for examination of witnesses and production of
documents [27(6), 70].

National Highway Authority of India vs. Oriental Structure Engineers Ltd. (AIR 2013 Del 67)

Fact

In National Highway Authority of India vs. Oriental Structure Engineers Ltd. (AIR 2013 Del 67), the Delhi High
Court examined Section 27(3) of the Arbitration Act. This section allows courts to issue processes to
witnesses in arbitration, similar to those in court trials, and address non-compliance by witnesses before
the arbitral tribunal.

judgment

The Delhi High Court ruled that under Section 27(3), courts can apply CPC provisions to enforce witness
processes in arbitration. If witnesses fail to comply or refuse to give evidence, the arbitral tribunal can
report to the court, which may impose penalties, disadvantages, or punishments, as it would in a regular
court case.

4. Making of Arbitral Award and Termination of Proceedings (Chapter VI)

This chapter governs the outcome of the arbitration and how the proceedings conclude.

Rules Applicable to Substance of Dispute (Section 28):

•In arbitrations other than international commercial arbitration where the place is in India, the
tribunal applies the substantive law in force in India [28(1)(a), 71].
•In international commercial arbitration where the place is in India:
-The tribunal applies the rules of law designated by the parties [28(1)(b)(i), 71].
-A designation of a country's law refers to its substantive law, not its conflict of laws rules, unless
expressed otherwise [28(1)(b)(ii), 72].
-Failing party designation, the tribunal applies the rules of law it considers appropriate given the
circumstances [28(1)(b)(iii), 72].
The tribunal can decide ex aequo et bono (according to what is just and fair) or as amiable
compositeur (as friendly settlers) only if expressly authorized by the parties [28(2), 72, 73].
 In all cases, the tribunal must take into account the terms of the contract and trade usages applicable
to the transaction [28(3), 73].

Decision Making by Panel of Arbitrators (Section 29): Unless agreed otherwise, in proceedings with more
than one arbitrator, decisions are made by a majority of all its members [29(1), 73]. Procedural questions
can be decided by the presiding arbitrator if authorized by the parties or all members [29(2), 74].
Time Limit for Arbitral Award (Section 29A):
In matters other than international commercial arbitration, the award must be made within twelve
months from the date of completion of pleadings [29A(1), 74].
In international commercial arbitration, the award should be made as expeditiously as possible,
with an endeavor to dispose of the matter within twelve months from the completion of pleadings [29A(1)
Proviso, 74, 75].
The parties can consent to extend the period by up to six months [29A(3), 76]. If the award is
not made within the specified or extended period, the mandate of the arbitrator(s) terminates
unless the Court has extended the period [29A(4), 76]. The Court can grant extensions for sufficient
cause and on terms it deems fit [29A(5), 77, 78]. If delay is attributable to the tribunal, the Court may
order a reduction of their fees [29A(4) First Proviso, 77]. The mandate continues while an application for
extension is pending [29A(4) Second Proviso, 77]. The arbitrator must be heard before fee reduction
[29A(4) Third Proviso, 77]. The Court can also substitute arbitrators while extending time, and the
reconstituted tribunal continues from the existing stage [29A(6), 29A(7), 78, 79]. The Court can impose
costs under this section [29A(8), 79].
Applications for extension should be disposed of within sixty days [29A(9), 79, 80].
Fast Track Procedure (Section 29B): Parties can agree in writing, at any stage, to resolve their
dispute through a fast track procedure [29B(1), 81, 82]. They may agree on a sole arbitrator [29B(2), 82]. The
tribunal decides based on written pleadings, documents, and submissions without oral hearings generally
[29B(3)(a), 83], but can call for further information [29B(3)(b), 83] or hold oral hearings if all parties request
or if the tribunal deems it necessary [29B(3)(c), 83, 84]. Technical formalities can be dispensed with for
expeditious disposal [29B(3)(d), 84]. The award must be made within six months from the date the tribunal
enters reference [29B(4), 84]. Provisions of Section 29A(3) to (9) regarding extension of time apply if the
award is not made within this period [29B(5), 84].

State of Orissa vs. B.N. Agarwalla (AIR 1997 SC 925)

Fact
In State of Orissa vs. B.N. Agarwalla (AIR 1997 SC 925), the Supreme Court examined the issue of
interest on an arbitral award. The focus was on whether the court’s failure to modify the award’s interest
from the date of the award to payment implies granting interest as per the arbitrator’s rate from the decree
date
Judgment
The Supreme Court held that if the court does not modify the arbitral award’s interest provision, it is
deemed to grant interest from the decree date at the arbitrator’s determined rate. Under Section 29, future
interest is considered ordered as per the award unless the court explicitly alters it, ensuring consistency with
the arbitrator’s decision.

Settlement (Section 30): If, during proceedings, the parties settle the dispute, the arbitral
tribunal can record the settlement as an arbitral award on agreed terms if requested by the parties [30(1),
85]. This award is made according to Section 31 and must state that it is an arbitral award [30(2), 30(3), 85].
An award on agreed terms has the same status and effects as any other arbitral award on the substance of
the dispute [30(4), 85].

Form and Contents of Arbitral Award (Section 31): An arbitral award must be in writing and signed by
the members of the arbitral tribunal [31(1), 85]. For multi-arbitrator tribunals, the signatures of the
majority are sufficient if the reason for any omitted signature is stated [31(2), 86]. The award must state
the reasons upon which it is based, unless the parties have agreed no reasons are needed or it's an award
on agreed terms [31(3), 86]. The award must state its date and the place of arbitration, and is deemed to
have been made at that place [31(4), 86]. A signed copy must be delivered to each party after it is made
[31(5), 87]. The tribunal can make interim arbitral awards on matters it can make a final award on [31(6),
87]. Unless agreed otherwise, an award for the payment of money may include interest from the date the
cause of action arose to the date of the award [31(7)(a), 87, 88]. A sum directed to be paid carries interest
at two percent higher than the current rate from the date of the award to the date of payment, unless
the award directs otherwise [31(7)(b), 88]. The costs of arbitration are fixed by the tribunal in accordance
with Section 31A [31(8), 89].
Regime for Costs (Section 31A): The Court or arbitral tribunal has the discretion to determine whether
costs are payable, the amount, and when they are to be paid, notwithstanding the Code of Civil
Procedure [31A(1), 89, 90]. "Costs" include fees and expenses of arbitrators, courts, and witnesses, legal
fees, administrative fees, and other expenses [31A(1) Explanation, 90, 91]. The general rule is that the
unsuccessful party pays the successful party's costs, but the tribunal can order differently with recorded
reasons [31A(2), 91]. In determining costs, the tribunal considers factors like the parties' conduct, partial
success, frivolous counterclaims, and reasonable settlement offers refused [31A(3), 92]. The tribunal can
make orders regarding specific types of costs and interest on costs [31A(4), 92, 93]. Agreements for one
party to pay all or part of the costs regardless of outcome are valid only if made after the dispute arose
[31A(5), 93].

Benarsi Krishna Committee & Ors. Vs. Karmyogi Shelters Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 9 SCC 496,

Fact
In Benarsi Krishna Committee & Ors. Vs. Karmyogi Shelters Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 9 SCC 496, the Supreme Court
addressed the issue of delivering a signed arbitral award under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration Act. The
case examined whether delivering the award to someone other than the party itself satisfies the legal
requirement for proper delivery.

Judgment
The Supreme Court ruled that delivering a signed copy of the arbitral award to someone other than the
party does not comply with Section 31(5). Proper compliance requires delivery to the party itself. This
ensures the party’s right to challenge the award under Section 34(3), safeguarding procedural fairness in
arbitration proceedings.

Termination of Proceedings (Section 32): Arbitral proceedings are terminated by the final arbitral award
or by a tribunal order [32(1), 93]. The tribunal issues a termination order when: the claimant withdraws
their claim (unless the respondent objects and has a legitimate interest in a final settlement); the parties
agree to terminate; or the tribunal finds that continuation has become unnecessary or impossible [32(2),
 94]. The mandate of the arbitral tribunal terminates with the termination of proceedings, subject to
Section 33 (correction/interpretation/additional award) and Section 34(4) (opportunity to resume to
eliminate grounds for setting aside) [32(3), 94, 95, 104, 105].

5. Correction and Interpretation of Award; Additional Award (Section 33)

Post-award mechanisms exist to address errors, ambiguities, and omissions.

Within thirty days of receiving the award (or another agreed period), a party can request the tribunal to
correct computation, clerical, or typographical errors [33(1)(a), 95]. If agreed by parties, a party can also
request an interpretation of a specific point [33(1)(b), 95, 96]. The tribunal will make the correction or
give the interpretation within thirty days of the request, and the interpretation forms part of the award
[33(2), 96]. The tribunal can also correct certain errors on its own initiative within thirty days of the
award date [33(3), 96].
Unless agreed otherwise, a party can request an additional arbitral award for claims presented but
omitted from the original award, within thirty days of receiving it [33(4), 97]. If the tribunal considers the
request justified, it will make the additional award within sixty days [33(5), 97].
The tribunal can extend the time limits for making a correction, interpretation, or additional award if
necessary [33(6), 97, 98]. Section 31 (form and contents) applies to any correction, interpretation, or
additional award made under Section 33 [33(7), 98].

These provisions collectively establish a comprehensive framework for the conduct of arbitration in India,
aiming for a fair efficient, and conclusive dispute resolution process.

In Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd. Vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (AIR 1999 HP 78)
Fact
In Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd. Vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (AIR 1999 HP 78), the court
examined Section 11 of the Arbitration Act regarding the appointment of arbitrators. The issue was whether
time limits apply, particularly under sub-sections (5) and (6), and the procedure for requesting the Chief Justice
to appoint an arbitrator.

Judgment
The court held that Section 11(5) sets a 30-day time limit for arbitrator appointment after a party’s request,
but no such limit exists under Section 11(6). A party may request the Chief Justice or his designate to take
necessary measures for appointment, unless the agreement specifies alternative methods, ensuring flexibility
in securing arbitrator appointments.