High Court cannot review or reopen an order passed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act once the arbitral process has commenced – SC
In Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. v. Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Ltd. (SLP (C) No. 4211 of 2025; 2025 INSC 1385), the Supreme Court held that a High Court cannot review or reopen an order passed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act once the arbitral process has commenced.
The Court observed that the power under Section 11 is narrow and there is no statutory basis for a review or reconsideration of such orders, especially after parties have actively participated in the arbitration. It reiterated that the Arbitration Act is a self-contained code, and once an arbitrator is appointed, the referring court becomes functus officio.
The Court further held that the arbitration agreement under Clause 25 was valid and subsisting, noting that both parties had invoked the clause on multiple occasions, participated in over seventy hearings, and jointly sought extensions under Section 29A, signifying clear waiver of any objections to arbitrability.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court restored the arbitral process and clarified that in circumstances where the arbitrator becomes unable to continue, the appropriate course is to appoint a substitute arbitrator under Section 15(2), rather than nullifying the proceedings altogether.
For any clarification, please write to [email protected]
