Bombay High Court
Naraindas Lilaram Adnani
Versus
Narsingdas Naraindas Adnani and others
Decided On:

Headnote:Sections 15 (b) and 16-Scope of.

       Under Section 15 (b) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 the Court may, by order, modify or correct an Award inter alia where the Award is imperfect in form or contain- any obvious error which can be amended without affecting such decision. Obviously the Court cannot substitute its own order for the A ward of the Arbitrator. But any obvious error in the A ward can be corrected by the court provided it does net affect the decision given by the Arbitrator.

       In the present case the decision of the Arbitrator is clear, namely, that the Narain Niwas property is exclusively the personal property of the appellant. It is also clear that respondents 1 and 2 cannot claim any part of it by virtue of their being partners in the firm. The only reason why the Arbitrator has not granted any consequential relief seems to be his impression that the possession of Respondents 1 and 2 was governed by the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act. This being clearly a mistake, it is possible to correct the same without affecting the decision of the Arbitrator. After all, the A ward must be couched in a form which would lead to finality. It should not be in a form which compels the parties to embark upon further litigation. If the mistake of the Arbitration is allowed to stand as it is, it would clearly lead to further litigation between the parties although their rights, inter se, are clearly decided by the Arbitrator. The mistake, therefore, can be corrected under Section 15 (b) of the Arbitration Act, 1940.

       Order 22, Rule 3-Succession Act, 1929, Section 213-Appeal-Pendency of.

       Death of appellant-LRs substitution application-Claiming that he is executor of will not probated-Though they already on record, no difficulty in transposing as appellant.

       For Citation : (1995) 1 BCJ 389