Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 JULY 2026

Arbitration At Large: Reasserting Jurisdictional Clarity And Procedural Pragmatism In Construction Disputes

Samagra Law
Samagra Law
Contributor
Explore more from Samagra Law

The Supreme Court’s decision in M/s Bhagheeratha Engineering Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 4, decided on 5 January 2026) represents a decisive reaffirmation of pro-arbitration principles under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Supreme Court’s decision in M/s Bhagheeratha Engineering Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 4, decided on 5 January 2026) represents a decisive reaffirmation of pro-arbitration principles under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

 The judgment addresses recurring tensions in construction arbitrations arising from multi-tier dispute resolution clauses and the scope of arbitral jurisdiction, particularly where procedural objections are raised belatedly or selectively.

The dispute arose out of four road maintenance contracts awarded under the Kerala State Transport Project. The contractual framework provided for a tiered dispute resolution mechanism: disputes were first to be considered by the Engineer, then referred to an Adjudicator within fourteen days if the contractor was dissatisfied, and thereafter capable of being referred to arbitration within twenty-eight days of the Adjudicator’s decision. The Adjudicator rendered a decision covering four disputes, partly in

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from