Appealability of court-ordered arbitration decrees affirmed, and appellate correction of miscalculation with future interest permitted.

A decree entered by a court in terms of an award pursuant to a court-ordered reference is appealable; Section 152(3) of the Companies Act does not bar such an appeal because the reference arose from a court order rather than a party written agreement. Where the decretal sum is shown to be miscalculated, the appellate court may correct the decretal amount to the correct figure and may award future interest at a rate it deems reasonable; here the decree was modified to the corrected sum and future interest fixed at six percent per annum from the stated payment date until payment.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an appeal lies against a decree entered by the Court in terms of an arbitral award where the reference to arbitration was made by the Court in a pending suit and one party is a joint stock company; (ii) Whether the decretal amount requires correction for miscalculation and whether future interest should be allowed, and at what rate.

Issue (i): Whether an appeal lies against a decree entered in terms of an award made pursuant to a court-ordered reference to arbitration where one party is a joint stock company under Section 152(3) of the Indian Companies Act.

Analysis: Section 152 applies where a joint stock company, by written agreement, refers disputes to arbitration under the Indian Arbitration Act. The present reference was made by the Court in a pending suit, not by a written agreement between parties; the arbitrator was required to submit his report to the Court which could pass a decree in the suit in accordance with the award or make such other order as lawful. The procedural character of a court-ordered reference distinguishes it from arbitrations governed by the Indian Arbitration Act under Section 152.

Conclusion: An appeal lies against the decree entered by the Court in terms of the award; Section 152(3) of the Indian Companies Act does not bar this appeal.

Issue (ii): Whether the decretal amount as entered requires correction for miscalculation and whether future interest should be awarded and at what rate.

Analysis: The parties and the record admit a miscalculation in the decretal amount. Contractual interest at 9% with yearly rests should have been calculated up to the date fixed for payment but the appellant sought enhancement only to a specified lesser sum, indicating calculation on a simple-interest basis. The Court may correct the decretal sum to reflect the admitted miscalculation up to the relevant date. The Court may also allow future interest at a rate it considers reasonable; simple interest at a lower rate can be awarded for the period after the payment date.

Conclusion: The decretal amount is modified to correct the miscalculation and fixed at Rs. 24,712-9-6 as due on 6th/8th January, 1935 (as declared), and future interest is allowed at 6% per annum on that amount from 6th January, 1935 until payment.

Final Conclusion: The appeal is allowed, the lower court decree is modified to correct the decretal sum and to provide for future interest at 6% per annum, and costs of the appeal are awarded against the specified respondent.

Ratio Decidendi: A decree entered by a court in terms of an award made pursuant to a court-ordered reference is appealable; where a decretal sum is shown to be miscalculated the appellate court may modify the decree to reflect the correct amount and may award future interest at a rate it deems reasonable.

---