Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2003 (9) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2003 (9) TMI 546 - SUPREME COURTWhether the Award will be void under section 16(3) of the Act in such cases even if the arbitrator fails to reconsider these matters and submit his decision within the time fixed? Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The entire Award was not remitted to the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator was only required to give determination on two points, and therefore, sub-section (3) is not applicable in the present case. The Parliament advisedly has restricted sub-section (3) of section 16 of the Act to an Award which would mean the whole Award or a part of it. The valid part of the Award always remains enforceable in a Court of law. What can be held to be void is that part of the Award which has not been made a Rule of Court by sustaining the objections raised with regard thereto inter alia on the ground that the same suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record or for any other reason; in the event the Arbitrator or Umpire fails to reconsider it and submits his decision within the time fixed therefor by the Court. In other words, the word ‘Award’ within the meaning of sub-section (3) would also include a part of the Award, which has been the subject-matter of the order of remission by the competent Court. In any view of the matter the applicability of sub-section (3) of section 16 of the Act, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, does not arise inasmuch as the matter is still pending before the Arbitrator.
|