Arbitration award challenge amendments barred when they add fresh grounds after limitation has expired.

Amendment of a memorandum of appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act may be permitted where it merely amplifies existing grounds and does not prejudice the other side, but it cannot be used to introduce a fresh challenge after the limitation period for setting aside the award has expired. The strict time bar in section 34(3) prevents a party from converting an amendment request into a new, time-barred proceeding. Where the additional grounds have no foundation in the original section 34 application, they are impermissible. On that basis, the refusal to allow amendment was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against refusal to set aside an arbitral award, the memorandum of appeal can be amended to raise additional grounds after the limitation period for challenging the award has expired.

Analysis: The law on amendment of pleadings is that procedural rules are intended to advance substantive justice, and amendment may be permitted if it does not cause injustice to the other side. The same approach applies to a memorandum of appeal, which may be amended under the procedural framework governing appeals. At the same time, section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 prescribes a strict time limit for challenging an award, and a proposed amendment cannot be used to introduce, for the first time, a fresh challenge that is in substance a new proceeding barred by limitation. The Court distinguished between permissible amplification of existing grounds and impermissible introduction of entirely new grounds unsupported by the original challenge. Since the additional grounds sought in the appeal were wholly new and had no foundation in the section 34 application, the refusal to permit amendment was justified.

Conclusion: The amendment to introduce new grounds in the memorandum of appeal was not permissible, and the order refusing amendment was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: An amendment to grounds in a challenge to an arbitral award may be allowed only where it does not amount to a fresh, time-barred challenge and is otherwise necessary in the interest of justice; entirely new grounds, without foundation in the original application, cannot be introduced after limitation has expired.

---