22 November 2021 | Gyan Prakash Arya v. Titan Industries Limited | Civil Appeal No. 6876 of 2021 | MR Shah and BV Nagarathna JJ | Supreme Court of India | 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1100

The Supreme Court has set aside the “corrections” made to an award and restored the original award ruling that what was done amounted to modification of the award which was beyond the scope of Section 33 ACA.

The arbitrator had allowed Gyan Arora’s claim of recovery of gold and directed Titan to return to him 3648.80 grams of pure gold along with interest. The value of gold was calculated at the rate Gyan had sought, i.e., Rs. 740 per gram.

Gyan’s alternative prayer for money was also awarded together with interest, i.e., INR 27,00,112 [3648.80 x 740] with interest.

Later, Gyan applied under Section 33 ACA to correct an “arithmetical” error in the statement of claim, and thus the award, by substituting 740 per gram to 20,747 per 10 gms. (i.e., 2074.7 per gm).

The application was allowed. Titan’s set aside application was dismissed and so was its appeal.

The Supreme Court set aside the modification ruling that this was not a case of arithmetical/clerical error and the modification was outside Section 33 ACA.

Read the judgment here.