Topic

arbitrator jurisdiction

3 articlesLatest April 2026
Section 11 Arbitration Act | Limitation Objections Must Be Decided by Arbitrator, Not Court: Bombay HC Reinforces Minimal Judicial Intervention
Case Law Analysis
|Bombay High Court

Section 11 Arbitration Act | Limitation Objections Must Be Decided by Arbitrator, Not Court: Bombay HC Reinforces Minimal Judicial Intervention

Bombay High Court rules that courts must refrain from adjudicating limitation objections under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, leaving such disputes exclusively to arbitrators. This decision aligns with the Supreme Court’s precedent in SBI General Insurance v. Krish Spinning, emphasizing legislative intent to limit judicial interference in arbitration proceedings and expedite dispute resolution.

Unilateral Arbitrator Appointment Without Mutual Consent Void Under Arbitration Act, 1940 : SC
Case Law Analysis
|Supreme Court of India

Unilateral Arbitrator Appointment Without Mutual Consent Void Under Arbitration Act, 1940 : SC

Supreme Court rules that an arbitration award is null and void if the arbitrator was appointed unilaterally by one party without mutual consent, even if the other party participated in proceedings. The judgment reinforces that jurisdictional defects in arbitration agreements cannot be cured by mere participation, impacting all contracts with similar dispute resolution clauses.