PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

1. The Arbitral Tribunal published an award on August 05, 2014. It was received by the respondent on a date not known because neither counsel could through light thereon, but certainly towards the end of August 2014, because both parties filed applications under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘the Act’) somewhere towards the end of the month, because the Section envisages clerical, typographic, computation errors and errors of the kind being made; probably because humans are prone to commit unintentional errors. Further, because humans are prone to errors of language, the provision envisages a correction thereof, inasmuch as parties may request the Arbitral Tribunal to give an interpretation of a specific point or part of the award.

2. On September 13, 2014, the Arbitral Tribunal disposed of the request of both sides under Section 33 of the Act. The order reads as under:-

“1. We have heard the learned advocates of both the parties with reference to their application under Section 33 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2. So far as the clerical errors pointed out in the claimants applicat