- (1.) A point of limitation has been raised by the respondent at the outset. The present petition is for challenging an arbitral award under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It is not in dispute that the award, passed on June 1, 2001, was made available to the petitioner on the same day. The petitioner has accepted as such in a subsequent application filed before the arbitrator. The present petition has been verified on October 4, 2001. Even if it is assumed that the present petition was filed on the same day, it was filed more than three months and thirty days from the date of the award. Such position has not been disputed by the petitioner.
(2.) At paragraph 14 of the petition it is averred that shortly upon the award being made, the petitioner carried an application under section 33 of the 1996 Act before the arbitrator and such application was rejected by an order of July 6, 2001. The petitioner seeks to compute the period relevant for section 34(3) of the 1996 Act from the date of dismissal of the petitioner's application by the arbitrator. If that is the relevant date as the petitioner insists it is, the petition has been filed within three months from such date.
(3.) The respondent says that section 34(3) of the Act must be seen in its substance. According to the petitioner, it is not the nomenclature of an application that describes its character but it is the content and purport of the application that determines its nature, section 33(1) of the 1996 Act has two limbs to it. Under the first part, a party to an arbitral reference may, within thirty days from the date of receipt of the arbitral award, request the arbitral tribunal to correct any computation errors or any clerical or typographical errors or any other errors of a similar nature occurring in the award. The second limb of the sub-section is of no relevance in the present context.;