The right to enforce an arbitral award under Section 36(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 accrues only after the correction of the award is adjudicated.

ORDER :

(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ.) 

Heard Mr. A.H. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

2. The present petition has been filed invoking extraordinary supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to attach illegality to the order dated 21.02.2025 passed by the Commercial Court, namely City Civil and Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Ahmedbabad in rejecting the execution application on the ground that it was presented prior to the expiry of period prescribed in Section 36(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1996”). While rejecting the execution application treating it as premature, liberty has been granted to the decree-holder, namely the petitioner herein to file a fresh execution petition after expiry of the prescribed period which is not having any stay granted by the competent court as provided under Section 34 of the Act, 1996.

2.1. We may simply record that the Commercial Court while rejecting the application has recorded that the arbitral award was passed on 16.12.2023, however, an application for correction of the award was filed under Section 33 of the Act, 1996 which was decided on 01.03.2024. The time period for filing application under Section 34(3) of the Act, 1996 would commence only after the corrected award was passed on 01.03.2024 i.e. the application under Section 33 of the Act, 1996 has been adjudicated. There is no dispute about the fact that the respondents have moved application under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 within the time prescribed under sub-section (3) of Section 34 of the Act, 1996 and the same is pending. However, the present petitioner, who is the decree-holder proceeded to move an application under Section 36 of the Act, 1996 for enforcement of the award on 04.05.2024, when right to seek enforcement of the arbitral award did not accrue to the petitioner/applicant in view of the clear and categorical language of sub-section (1) of Section 36 of the Act, 1996.

3. Taking note of the above, we do not find any good ground to attach any illegality to the order passed by the Commercial Court that too by invoking our extraordinary supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It is always open for the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy by filing a proper application before the competent authority.

4. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to cost.