Modification of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 referred to larger Bench amid conflicting precedent.

The Supreme Court noted recurring conflict on whether Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 permit modification of an arbitral award, whether any such power is limited to severable parts, and whether setting aside includes modification. It found that authoritative clarification was required and referred the questions to a larger Bench. No final ruling was rendered on the substantive legal issues, which remain open for determination. The order was procedural, while also disposing of the interlocutory request and extending time for compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Court's powers under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 include the power to modify an arbitral award; whether such power, if available, is confined to severable parts of the award; whether the power to set aside an award includes the power to modify it; and whether the leading precedent on this question states the correct law.

Analysis: The order does not finally decide the merits of these questions. It records that the issue of modification of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 has arisen repeatedly and that conflicting decisions exist, making authoritative clarification necessary. The questions are therefore referred to a larger Bench for answers.

Conclusion: No final ruling is rendered on the substantive questions referred for larger-Bench consideration.

Final Conclusion: The order is procedural in nature and leaves the merits of the controversy open for determination by a larger Bench, while also disposing of the interlocutory request and extending the time for compliance.

---