In Re: Interplay — Arbitration & Stamp Act
Non-stamping of a contract does not void the arbitration clause — the defect is curable before the arbitral tribunal (separability principle confirmed).
Analysis
Arbitration Practice — Kerala & India
Arbitration Lawyers in Kerala — Procedure, Interim Relief & Award Challenge
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 governs every stage of the arbitral process in India — from the clause in the contract through appointment, conduct, award and enforcement. The practice handles the full lifecycle before the Kerala High Court and arbitral tribunals.
Quick Summary — The Legal Framework
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (as amended in 2015, 2019 and 2021) is the primary statute governing arbitration in India. It is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. Part I covers domestic arbitrations and international commercial arbitrations seated in India. Part II governs enforcement of foreign awards under the New York Convention, 1958.
The seat of arbitration is the critical jurisdictional concept. The seat — not the venue of hearings — determines which court has exclusive supervisory jurisdiction. An arbitration clause specifying Kochi or Ernakulam as the seat vests exclusive supervisory jurisdiction in the Kerala High Court for all Section 9, Section 11, Section 34 and Section 37 applications. This principle was settled in BALCO v. Kaiser Aluminium (2012) and reaffirmed in BGS SGS Soma JV v. NHPC (2019).
The Act provides mandatory timelines: Section 11 applications must be decided within 60 days; awards must be made within 12 months of the tribunal entering reference (extendable to 18 months by consent, or further by court order). Fast-track arbitration for disputes below Rs. 1 crore must conclude within 6 months.
Key References
Last reviewed: June 2026
The Arbitration Life Cycle
From Clause to Enforcement — Seven Stages
Most commercial contracts contain an arbitration clause without either party expecting to use it. When a dispute arises, the clause determines the process. Understanding what happens at each stage — and what rights and deadlines apply — determines whether the arbitration is won or lost before the first hearing.
Section 8
Referral to Arbitration — When a Civil Suit Is Filed Despite an Arbitration Clause
Section 8 of the Arbitration Act is the gateway provision for situations where a party files a civil suit in court despite the existence of a valid arbitration clause in the contract. The section requires the court to refer the parties to arbitration if a valid arbitration agreement exists covering the subject matter of the dispute.
The right to seek referral under Section 8 is lost if the defendant files their written statement in court without reserving the right to arbitrate. The application must be made before submitting the first statement on the merits to the court. Appearing and seeking adjournments, while not filing a written statement, generally does not constitute a waiver — but it is a risk that must not be tested.
Step 1 — Check the Clause
Confirm a Valid Arbitration Agreement Exists
Before filing the Section 8 application, verify that the contract between the parties contains a valid arbitration clause covering the subject matter of the suit. The clause must be in writing (Section 7). It need not be signed separately — an arbitration clause in an unsigned contract can still be valid if it was communicated to and accepted by the other party. An unsigned contract may bind parties through their conduct.
Step 2 — Before Written Statement
File the Section 8 Application Before Any Merits Statement
The Section 8 application is filed in the civil court where the suit is pending. It must be filed before submitting the first statement on the merits of the dispute. The application should attach the original contract with the arbitration clause (or a certified copy), and a brief statement that the dispute falls within the arbitration agreement.
Court's Duty
Court Must Refer — No Discretion
If the applicant satisfies the court that a valid arbitration agreement exists, the court must refer the parties to arbitration. The court's examination is limited and prima facie — it cannot decide the merits of the dispute or conduct a full trial on whether the agreement is valid. Only if the agreement is null and void, inoperative, or incapable of being performed can the court refuse referral. This high threshold was affirmed in Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading (2021).
Section 37(1)(a) Appeal
Appeal Against Refusal to Refer
If the court refuses to refer parties to arbitration under Section 8, an appeal lies under Section 37(1)(a). An order referring parties to arbitration is not separately appealable under Section 37 — it proceeds as an arbitration. The appeal under Section 37(1)(a) must be filed promptly, as delay may prejudice the arbitration timeline.
Critical: A party that files a written statement on the merits of the suit before making the Section 8 application has almost certainly waived the right to arbitration. Immediate legal advice is essential when a civil suit is received in a matter governed by an arbitration clause.
Section 9
Interim Relief — Asset Protection Before and During Arbitration
Section 9 of the Arbitration Act empowers the court to grant interim measures of protection before the arbitral proceedings are initiated, during the proceedings, or after the award but before its enforcement. It is the most practically important provision in Indian arbitration — because an award without assets to satisfy it is worthless.
A Section 9 application is filed before the court at the seat of arbitration (the Kerala High Court for Kochi-seated arbitrations). The application can be made before the Arbitral Tribunal is even constituted — which is why it is essential to move under Section 9 immediately when assets are at risk, without waiting for the arbitrator to be appointed.
Types of Relief
What Section 9 Can Order
The court can grant: (a) Attachment of the other party's movable and immovable property before any award; (b) Injunction restraining the other party from transferring, disposing of, or creating third-party rights over specific assets; (c) Appointment of Receiver to take possession, manage, and preserve property pending the arbitration; (d) Status quo orders preserving the existing state of affairs; (e) Interim custody of goods and collection of rents. The list is illustrative, not exhaustive.
Ex Parte Relief
Same-Day Relief Without Notice
In genuine emergencies — where giving notice to the other party would defeat the purpose — the court can grant an ex parte (without notice) ad interim injunction on the day of filing. The court then issues notice to the opposite party for a hearing on whether the interim order should continue. To obtain ex parte relief, the applicant must demonstrate urgency, irreparable harm, and a prima facie case on the merits of the underlying dispute.
Timing
Before, During or After the Award
Section 9 relief can be obtained: (a) Before commencement of arbitral proceedings — even before the arbitration notice is issued in an emergency; (b) During arbitral proceedings — at any point until the award is made; (c) After the award but before enforcement — to preserve assets pending the execution proceedings. Once the Arbitral Tribunal is constituted, the court must generally not entertain Section 9 applications unless the tribunal is unable to act effectively (Section 9(3)).
Section 17
Parallel Power of the Arbitral Tribunal
The Arbitral Tribunal also has power to grant interim relief under Section 17 of the Act, and such orders have the same effect as court orders and are enforceable in the same manner. Once the Tribunal is constituted, applications for interim measures should typically be made to the Tribunal under Section 17 first. Section 9 remains available post-constitution only where the Tribunal is unable to provide effective relief.
Section 11
Appointment of Arbitrator — When the Other Party Refuses to Cooperate
Section 11 of the Arbitration Act provides the remedy when a party refuses to participate in the appointment of an arbitrator, or when the appointment process has broken down. Without an arbitrator, the arbitration cannot proceed — Section 11 allows the Kerala High Court to make the appointment and start the clock.
The High Court's role at Section 11 stage is limited to a prima facie examination: does a valid arbitration agreement exist? Does the dispute fall within it? All other questions of jurisdiction and merits are reserved for the Arbitral Tribunal under the principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz (Section 16).
Trigger
When Section 11 Is Available
Section 11 applies in three situations: (a) A party fails to appoint its arbitrator within 30 days of being requested; (b) The two party-nominated arbitrators fail to agree on the presiding (third) arbitrator within 30 days of their appointment; (c) In a sole arbitrator agreement, the parties fail to agree on the name within 30 days of one party requesting the other to agree. In each case, either party may apply to the High Court for appointment.
Unilateral Appointment — Invalid
Perkins Eastman Rule — Challenging a Biased Appointment
A contractual clause giving one party the unilateral right to appoint the sole arbitrator is invalid under Indian law. The Supreme Court held in Perkins Eastman v. HSCC (2020), following TRF Ltd. v. Energo (2017), that a person who is ineligible to act as arbitrator under Section 12(5) cannot appoint one either. Where such a clause exists in a contract, a Section 11 petition should be filed before the unilaterally appointed arbitrator takes any procedural steps in the arbitration.
60-Day Timeline
High Court Must Decide Within 60 Days
The Supreme Court has directed that Section 11 petitions must be disposed of within 60 days of filing. In practice, given the volume of High Court work, timelines may vary. The Section 11 application itself must describe the arbitration agreement, the notice sent to the other party, the demand for appointment, and the failure to appoint. The petition is filed in the Kerala High Court for Kochi-seated arbitrations.
Appointment Authority
Institutional vs Ad Hoc Appointment
Where the contract designates an institutional appointing authority — such as the Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre (KHAC), the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration (MCIA), or the Indian Council of Arbitration (ICA) — appointment under that institution's rules takes precedence. A Section 11 petition before the High Court is the fallback where institutional appointment fails or no institution is specified. The KHAC appointment procedure is faster and cheaper than a Section 11 petition for Kochi-based parties.
Section 34
Challenge to an Arbitral Award — Narrow Grounds, Strict Deadline
Section 34 is the only mechanism to challenge a domestic arbitral award in court. It is emphatically not an appeal on the merits — courts do not re-examine the evidence, re-appreciate facts, or substitute their view for the arbitrator's. The challenge is limited to the enumerated grounds in Section 34(2) and Section 34(2A). A mere disagreement with the arbitrator's findings — even if the court would have decided differently — is not a ground.
The limitation period is absolute. The application must be filed within 3 months of the date of receipt of the award. The court may condone a delay of up to 30 additional days on showing sufficient cause — but no extension beyond that 30-day window is available, regardless of the circumstances. If the Section 34 application is not filed in time, the award becomes enforceable as a court decree.
Limitation — Act Immediately: The 3-month period runs from the date the award is received. If the award has been received, seek legal advice the same day. Do not wait to assess the award's contents over several weeks.
The recognised grounds for setting aside an award under Section 34:
Incapacity of a Party
A party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity at the time the agreement was made — for example, a minor, or a person of unsound mind who lacked legal capacity to contract.
Invalid Arbitration Agreement
The arbitration agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties subjected it, or — if no choice is made — under Indian law. For instance, an arbitration clause with an inoperable mechanism.
No Proper Notice
A party was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator, or of the arbitral proceedings, or was otherwise unable to present their case.
Award Beyond Scope
The award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission.
Improper Tribunal Composition
The composition of the arbitral tribunal, or the arbitral procedure, was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties (or, in the absence of agreement, the Act).
Non-Arbitrable Subject Matter
The subject matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under Indian law — for example, certain criminal matters, matrimonial matters, or insolvency-related disputes.
Public Policy
The award is in conflict with the public policy of India — interpreted narrowly post-2015 to mean: induced by fraud or corruption, in contravention of fundamental policy of Indian law, or in conflict with the most basic notions of morality or justice.
Patent Illegality (Domestic Only)
For domestic awards (not international commercial arbitration), an award can be set aside if it is patently illegal — meaning the illegality must go to the root of the matter and be apparent on the face of the award. A mere wrong application of law is not patent illegality.
Section 37
Section 37 Appeal — Limited to Specified Orders, No Second Appeal
Section 37 provides the only statutory avenue of appeal in arbitration matters. The right of appeal is limited to specific orders and does not extend to a general right to appeal all court decisions in arbitration matters. This limitation reflects the finality principle of arbitration — which the Act was designed to preserve.
Section 37(1) Appeals
Appeals from Court Orders
An appeal lies under Section 37(1) from the following court orders: (a) refusing to refer parties to arbitration under Section 8 (granting referral is not separately appealable); (b) granting or refusing to grant a measure under Section 9; (c) setting aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34. No other court orders in arbitration matters are appealable as of right under Section 37.
Section 37(2) Appeals
Appeals from Tribunal Orders
An appeal lies under Section 37(2) from the following Arbitral Tribunal orders: (a) accepting a plea that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction (under Section 16); (b) accepting a plea that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction; (c) granting or refusing to grant interim measures under Section 17. An order by the Tribunal that it has jurisdiction, or refusing to grant interim relief, is not appealable under Section 37(2).
No Second Appeal
Section 37 Order Is Final
Section 37(3) expressly prohibits a second appeal from an order passed under Section 37. The appellate court's Section 37 order is final on that issue — further challenge can only be to the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution, which is a discretionary jurisdiction. The Supreme Court rarely interferes with Section 37 orders on the merits of the arbitral dispute.
Section 36
Enforcement of Arbitral Awards — Decree of Court
An arbitral award is enforced as if it were a decree of the court — this means all the execution mechanisms available for court decrees apply. Once the award is final (either because the Section 34 challenge period has expired without a challenge, or a Section 34 challenge has been dismissed), an execution petition is filed before the executing court.
Where a Section 34 challenge is filed, enforcement is not automatically stayed. A separate application under Section 36(2) must be made for a conditional stay of enforcement, and the court may impose conditions before granting the stay — including deposit of a portion of the awarded amount.
Domestic Awards
Execution as a Court Decree
A domestic award under Part I of the Act is enforced through an execution petition filed before the court that would have jurisdiction over the subject matter — or the court within whose jurisdiction the judgment debtor's assets are located. Modes of execution include attachment and sale of movable and immovable property, garnishee orders over bank accounts, and appointment of a receiver. The arbitral award itself is the decree — no further court proceedings are needed to establish liability.
Foreign Awards
New York Convention — Part II
Foreign arbitral awards from countries notified under the New York Convention, 1958 and the Geneva Convention are enforceable in India under Part II of the Act. The award holder files an execution petition before the High Court having jurisdiction. The court enforces the award unless the respondent establishes one of the limited grounds for refusal under Section 48 — which mirror the Section 34 grounds with modifications. The standard for refusal is high and foreign awards are generally enforced.
Stay of Enforcement
Section 34 Challenge Does Not Automatically Stay Enforcement
The 2015 amendment reversed the prior position. A Section 34 application no longer automatically stays the enforcement of the award. The party challenging the award must apply separately for a conditional stay under Section 36(2), and the court must be satisfied that a case for stay is made out — typically on the same principles as a stay of a court decree. The court may impose conditions including deposit of part of the award amount before granting the stay.
Drafting Arbitration Clauses
Arbitration Clauses — What They Must Say, and Model Clauses
An arbitration clause is only as good as what it says. A poorly drafted clause — one that is silent on the seat, ambiguous on the number of arbitrators, or creates an inoperable appointment mechanism — generates satellite litigation that delays the resolution of the underlying dispute by years. The five essential elements of a valid and enforceable arbitration clause are: (1) a present obligation to arbitrate; (2) the seat; (3) the number of arbitrators; (4) the governing law; and (5) the language of proceedings.
Model Ad Hoc Arbitration Clause — Two-Party Commercial Contract
SimpleSuitable for contracts between two parties where the parties prefer ad hoc arbitration without institutional rules. The seat is specified, conferring exclusive supervisory jurisdiction on the Kerala High Court.
Dispute Resolution:
Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or the breach, termination or invalidity thereof, shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (as amended). The arbitration shall be conducted by a sole arbitrator appointed by mutual agreement of the parties. If the parties fail to agree on an arbitrator within 30 (thirty) days of a written request by either party, the arbitrator shall be appointed by the Kerala High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The seat and venue of arbitration shall be Kochi, Kerala, India. The language of arbitration shall be English. The governing law of this Agreement shall be the laws of India. The award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties.
Notes: "Seat" and "venue" are used together to avoid ambiguity following BGS SGS Soma JV. Three-arbitrator variant: replace "sole arbitrator" with "a panel of three arbitrators — one to be appointed by each party and the third (presiding arbitrator) to be appointed by the two party-nominated arbitrators."
KHAC Institutional Arbitration Clause — Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre
InstitutionalRecommended for commercial contracts between parties in Kerala. Institutional arbitration through KHAC provides administered arbitration with professional case management, faster appointment, and a schedule of fees — reducing the procedural friction of ad hoc arbitration.
Arbitration:
Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, including any question regarding its existence, validity, breach or termination, shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration under the Rules of the Kerala High Court Arbitration Centre (KHAC), which Rules are deemed to be incorporated by reference into this clause. The number of arbitrators shall be [one / three]. The seat of arbitration shall be Kochi, Kerala, India. The language of the arbitration shall be English. The governing law of this Agreement shall be the laws of India.
Notes: KHAC rules are available at arbitration.keralacourts.in. Institutional rules provide a default appointment procedure, fee schedule, and case management — reducing Section 11 litigation. Recommended for contracts valued above Rs. 50 lakhs.
Partnership Deed / LLP Agreement Arbitration Clause
PartnershipPartnership and LLP agreement arbitration clauses must address: (a) the scope — all disputes between partners or only management disputes; (b) whether dissolution disputes are also arbitrable; and (c) the number of arbitrators relative to the number of partners (odd number recommended). Note: compulsory winding up orders may not be arbitrable.
Arbitration:
Any dispute, controversy or claim between the Partners arising out of or in connection with this Partnership Deed — including any dispute regarding the management of the firm, the sharing of profits and losses, the accounts of the firm, the retirement or expulsion of a Partner, or the dissolution of the firm — shall be referred to arbitration before a sole arbitrator to be mutually agreed by the Partners within 30 (thirty) days of a written notice invoking this clause. If the Partners fail to agree on the arbitrator within 30 days, the arbitrator shall be appointed by the Kerala High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The seat of arbitration shall be Kochi, Kerala. The language shall be English. The award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on all Partners and shall be accepted by them as conclusive settlement of the dispute.
Notes: Add "including any dispute regarding the voluntary or compulsory dissolution" only after confirming the nature of dissolution is arbitrable in the specific context. Accounts disputes and profit-sharing disputes are clearly arbitrable.
Joint Venture Agreement Arbitration Clause
JV / Multi-PartyJoint venture agreements require particular care on: (a) consolidation — whether all disputes under all JV documents go to the same arbitration; (b) the number of arbitrators when there are more than two parties; and (c) the treatment of third-party claims that may arise from the JV's activities. The following clause is for a two-party JV.
Dispute Resolution:
Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this Joint Venture Agreement, including any question regarding its existence, interpretation, breach, termination or invalidity, shall be first referred for settlement by negotiation between the designated representatives of the Parties. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 (thirty) days of written notice of dispute (or such longer period as the Parties may agree in writing), either Party may refer the dispute to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The arbitration shall be conducted by a panel of three (3) arbitrators: one to be nominated by each Party within 21 (twenty-one) days of notice of arbitration, and the presiding arbitrator to be appointed by the two Party-nominated arbitrators within 21 (twenty-one) days of their appointment. If any appointment is not made within the prescribed time, the outstanding appointment(s) shall be made by the Kerala High Court under Section 11 of the Act. The seat of arbitration shall be Kochi, Kerala, India. The language shall be English. The award shall be final and binding.
Notes: The negotiation step is optional but recommended for JVs. If institutional rules are preferred, replace the appointment provisions with "under the Rules of [KHAC / MCIA]". For JVs where confidentiality is critical, add: "The parties and the arbitrators shall keep confidential all matters relating to the arbitral proceedings and the award."
Frequently Asked Questions — Arbitration
What is Section 8 of the Arbitration Act and when does it apply?
Section 8 applies when a party files a civil suit in court despite the existence of a valid arbitration clause in the contract. The defendant must apply under Section 8 — before filing the written statement on the merits — asking the court to refer the dispute to arbitration. If the court is satisfied that a valid arbitration agreement exists covering the subject matter, it must refer the parties to arbitration. There is no discretion once the condition is met. The risk: if the written statement is filed on the merits before the Section 8 application, the right to arbitration is likely waived.
What relief is available under Section 9 before arbitration starts?
Section 9 allows the court to grant interim measures of protection including: attachment of assets to prevent dissipation, injunctions restraining transfer or disposal of property, appointment of a receiver, orders for preservation and custody of goods, and interim custody of cash and receivables. The application can be filed before the Arbitral Tribunal is constituted and before even issuing the arbitration notice in a genuine emergency. An ex parte injunction — without notice to the other party — can be granted on the day of filing where there is evidence of urgency and a credible risk of dissipation.
How is an arbitrator appointed under Section 11 when the other party refuses?
If the other party fails to appoint its arbitrator within 30 days of being requested, a Section 11 petition is filed before the Kerala High Court (for Kochi-seated arbitrations). The court's role is limited to a prima facie check — does a valid arbitration agreement exist? If yes, the court appoints the arbitrator regardless of the non-cooperating party's objections. The petition must describe the arbitration agreement, the notice sent, the demand for appointment, and the failure. The Supreme Court has directed that Section 11 petitions must be decided within 60 days of filing.
On what grounds can an arbitral award be set aside under Section 34?
Section 34 grounds are narrow: incapacity of a party; invalid arbitration agreement; no proper notice of proceedings; award beyond the scope of submission; improper composition of the tribunal; non-arbitrable subject matter; or conflict with the public policy of India. For domestic awards, an additional ground is patent illegality on the face of the award. Courts do not re-examine the merits or reappreciate evidence. A disagreement with the arbitrator's finding — even if the court would have decided otherwise — is not a ground.
What is the time limit for challenging an arbitral award and can it be extended?
The Section 34 application must be filed within 3 months of the date of receipt of the award. The court may condone a delay of up to a maximum of 30 additional days on sufficient cause being shown — but no extension beyond that 30-day window is available under any circumstances. This combined period of 3 months plus 30 days is absolute and non-extendable. Seek legal advice on the date of receiving the award — do not delay the assessment of whether to challenge.
Does filing a Section 34 challenge automatically stay enforcement of the award?
No — the 2015 amendment removed the automatic stay. Filing a Section 34 application does not stay enforcement. The challenging party must separately apply under Section 36(2) for a conditional stay. The court may impose conditions including deposit of the award amount (or a portion) before granting the stay. Where no stay is obtained, the award-holder can proceed with execution of the award as a decree of court even while the Section 34 challenge is pending.
What should a good arbitration clause in a contract contain?
Every enforceable arbitration clause must contain: (1) a mandatory agreement to arbitrate all disputes arising from the contract; (2) the seat of arbitration — the city that determines which court has supervisory jurisdiction; (3) the number of arbitrators — one or three; (4) the governing law; and (5) the language. Optionally: the institutional rules to be followed (KHAC, MCIA, ICC) and a pre-arbitration negotiation step. Clauses that are silent on the seat have generated extensive litigation on jurisdiction — always specify the seat.
Does the arbitration clause survive if the main contract is terminated or held void?
Yes. The arbitration clause is a separate agreement within the contract — the separability principle (Section 16 of the Act). A decision that the main contract is void, terminated, or illegal does not automatically invalidate the arbitration clause. The Arbitral Tribunal retains jurisdiction to decide on the consequences of the void contract. This principle was confirmed by the Supreme Court Constitution Bench in In Re: Interplay (2023), which also settled the position on unstamped contracts and arbitration clauses.
Can a non-signatory to a contract be brought into arbitration?
In limited circumstances, yes. The Supreme Court's Constitution Bench in Cox & Kings v. SAP India (2023) recognised the group of companies doctrine — a non-signatory member of a corporate group may be bound by an arbitration agreement where their conduct demonstrates implied consent, or where they were the directing mind behind the contracting entity. The doctrine requires careful case-by-case analysis. Its application in any specific dispute depends on the ownership structure, the nature of the non-signatory's involvement, and the substance of the dispute.
Discuss Your Arbitration Matter
Arbitration — Kerala High Court & Arbitral Tribunals
Whether initiating arbitration, defending a claim, applying for Section 9 interim relief, or facing a Section 34 challenge to an award — the office advises on the full arbitration life cycle. Response within one working day.
Leading Judgments
Key Decisions in Arbitration Law
Cox & Kings v. SAP India
Non-signatory group company members may be bound by an arbitration agreement if their conduct demonstrates implied consent — group of companies doctrine confirmed.
AnalysisVidya Drolia v. Durga Trading
A dispute is non-arbitrable only if it falls within four defined categories. At the Section 11 stage, courts conduct only a prima facie review.
AnalysisPerkins Eastman v. HSCC
A party ineligible to act as arbitrator under Section 12(5) cannot appoint one either — unilateral appointment clauses are invalid.
AnalysisBGS SGS Soma JV v. NHPC
Where an arbitration clause designates a venue with no other jurisdictional clause, that venue is the juridical seat — supervisory jurisdiction follows.
AnalysisGayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft
Courts may under Section 34(4) remit an award to the tribunal to cure specific defects — but cannot modify the substantive content of the award themselves.
AnalysisSsangyong Engineering v. NHAI
Post-2015, patent illegality requires that the illegality goes to the root and is so perverse that no reasonable person could have reached the decision.
AnalysisBALCO v. Kaiser Aluminium
Part I of the Act applies exclusively to India-seated arbitrations. The seat determines which court has supervisory jurisdiction — the foundational seat-jurisdiction principle.
AnalysisPASL Wind Solutions v. GE Power
Two Indian parties may designate a foreign seat — the resulting award is enforceable in India as a New York Convention foreign award.
Analysis