Procedural review in arbitration appeals can correct an apparent record error where an unargued limitation point caused prejudice.

A High Court exercising appellate jurisdiction under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 may correct an error apparent on the face of its own record by procedural review as a court of record. The absence of an express review provision in the Act does not bar correction of a procedural mistake where the earlier judgment went beyond the issues actually argued and caused prejudice. The Court therefore treated the review as maintainable, corrected the limitation finding so it applied only to the claims actually pressed, and left the remaining claims for further hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court could entertain a review petition, in the context of an appeal under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to correct an apparent error in its earlier judgment by exercising procedural review and its plenary powers as a court of record.

Analysis: The earlier judgment had set aside the arbitral award on limitation not only for claim nos. 3 to 5, which were specifically in issue, but also for claim nos. 1 and 2, although the record showed that limitation had not been pressed against those claims. The Court held that a High Court, as a court of record, retains inherent and plenary power to correct an apparent error in its own order to prevent miscarriage of justice. It distinguished a procedural review from a review on merits and held that the absence of an express review provision in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 did not bar correction of a procedural mistake apparent on the record. The Court further held that the review petitioner had no opportunity to meet the unargued limitation objection against claim nos. 1 and 2.

Conclusion: The review petition was maintainable and was allowed; the earlier judgment was corrected to confine the limitation finding to the claims actually pressed, leaving claim nos. 1 and 2 for further hearing.

Final Conclusion: The Court recognised its power to correct an apparent procedural error in an arbitration appeal judgment and reopened the matter to the limited extent necessary for reconsideration of the remaining claims.

Ratio Decidendi: A High Court, even while exercising appellate jurisdiction under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, may invoke its inherent plenary power as a court of record to correct an error apparent on the face of the record by procedural review, where the error goes to the root of the matter and has caused prejudice.

---