Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 AUGUST 2023

Conflict In The Definition Of "Court" Under The Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 While Interpreting Section 29A And Section 11

Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Contributor
Khaitan & Co.

Khaitan & Co.

Founded in 1911, Khaitan & Co is a heritage law firm that has been a trusted adviser to leading...

View firm profile
Explore more from Khaitan & Co.

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act") envisages a limited role for courts as facilitators and overseers of the arbitration process...

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Introduction and background

  1. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act") envisages a limited role for courts as facilitators and overseers of the arbitration process, through specific provisions which provide for their intervention at various stages. To this end, the Act expressly defines the term "Court" in section 2(1)(e) as:

    "2. Definitions:
    1. In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires.
      1. the principal civil court of original jurisdiction in a district and includes the High Court exercising its ordinary original jurisdiction."
  2. It merits mention in this regard that only the High Courts of Delhi, Bombay, Madras and Calcutta are vested with ordinary original jurisdiction. However, there are specific powers vested only upon High Courts and the Supreme Court under the Act, one of such power being the power of appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Act. This gives rise to an anomalous situation where in certain

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 document does not necessarily reflect the views / position of Khaitan & Co but remain solely those of the author(s). For any further queries or follow up, please contact Khaitan & Co at [email protected].

See more popular content from