J U D G M E N T

23.08.2023 MINI PUSHKARNA, J.

Introduction

1. The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “Arbitration Act”) has been filed challenging the Award dated 11th December, 2017 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal consisting of three retired Judges of this Court. It is the case of petitioner that though the Arbitral Tribunal has passed the Award in its favour by upholding the submissions made by it in respect of its claims, however, the Arbitral Tribunal erred in not reflecting in the concluding para of the Award, the relief/amount with regard to one of the claims raised by the petitioner for Rs. 2.82 crores.

2. Perusal of the record in the present case shows that though the present petition was listed before the Court for the first time on 05th September, 2018, however, substantive hearing took place for the first time only on 13th February, 2019. On the said date, preliminary objection was raised on behalf of respondents with regard to maintainability of the present petition on the ground of limitation. Thus, matter has been heard by this Court only on the preliminary objection as regards maintainability of the present petition. It is further to be noted that on account of preliminary objection raised by the respondents, no notice has been issued in the present case.

Factual Matrix

3. Facts in brief are that the Organising Committee Commonwealth Games 2010 (“OC CWG”), now Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India (“MoYAS”), and the consortium of Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd., now known as Ernst & Young LLP (“EY”) and M/s Event Knowledge Services (“EKS”), Switzerland, had entered into agreement dated 24th March, 2008 (“Agreement”) for providing games planning, project management and work force services. On 01st June, 2009, all rights, duties and obligations of EKS, Switzerland stood transferred to EKS Mauritius by way of a Deed of Assignment.

4. Since disputes arose between the parties, OC CWG, invoked Clause 46 of the Agreement, vide Notice dated 20.11.2012 for adjudication of disputes between the parties by arbitration. Accordingly, the Arbitral Tribunal comprising of three retired Judges of this Court was constituted.

5. OC CWG (now MoYAS) filed its Statement of Claim dated 24th October, 2013, claiming the following reliefs:

i. Pass an award for a sum of Rs.2.82 Crores along with interest @ 18% per annum till filing of the aforesaid statement of claim in favour of the claimant and jointly and severally against the respondents.

ii. Pass an award for a sum of Rs.3.07 Crores along with interest @ 18% per annum till filing of the aforesaid statement of claim in favour of the claimant and jointly and severally against the respondents.

iii. Award pendent-lite and future interest on the aforesaid amount.

iv. Award cost of proceedings.

6. Respondent No.1 filed its Statement of Defence on 01st January, 2014, disputing the claims and raised the following counter claims:

i. Award a sum of Rs.1,17,66,131.17/- in favour of the counter claimant and against the Organising Committee.

ii. Award interest @ 4% compounded annually on Rs.1,17,66,131.17/- w.e.f. 07.07.2010 till date of actual payment.

7. The Arbitral Tribunal vide Award dated 11th December, 2017 passed the following Award:

i. Sum of Rs.25,04,259/- was awarded in favour of the petitioner/claimant - OC CWG, against the respondents jointly and severally with Simple Interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of claim to the date of passing of the Award along with interest @18% from the date of Award till the payment of awarded sum to the claimant.

ii. All the counter claims of respondents were rejected.

iii. Petitioner/Claimant was held entitled to cost of Rs.20 Lakhs payable by the respondents.

8. On 10th January, 2018, petitioner filed a request under Section 33(1) of the Arbitration Act requesting the Arbitral Tribunal to reflect in its concluding paragraph, the relief regarding its claim for a sum of Rs.2.82