SC Rules that Courts have a Limited Power to Modify Arbitral Awards under Sections 34 & 37 of Arbitration Act

Our undertakings for long-term impact are an organic extension of our purpose.

They are to employ our deep knowledge of the law beyond the business, the transaction, the deal. To use the opportunities and skills we possess, to reflect on the culture we’re creating. Individually and collectively, these are our efforts to help shape the thinking of our future generations, and arm them with strategies for true, sustainable growth.

Jul 29, 2025

SC Rules that Courts have a Limited Power to Modify Arbitral Awards under Sections 34 & 37 of Arbitration Act

The Supreme Court (‘SC’) in Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies Limited,^[1] held, inter alia, that Courts have limited power under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Arbitration Act’) to modify the arbitral award, which can be exercised under the following circumstances:

i. when the award is severable, by severing the ‘invalid’ portion from the ‘valid’ portion of the award;

ii. by correcting any clerical, computational or typographical errors;

iii. post award interest in some circumstances; and

iv. while Article 142 of the Constitution (Enforcement of decrees and orders of SC and orders as to discovery, etc.) applies, it should be exercised cautiously and within the limits of the constitutional power.

[1] Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 986.

DISCLAIMER

These are the views and opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firm. This article is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal or other advice and you acknowledge that there is no relationship (implied, legal or fiduciary) between you and the author/AZB. AZB does not claim that the article's content or information is accurate, correct or complete, and disclaims all liability for any loss or damage caused through error or omission.