Modeled after the UNCITRAL Model Code, the Arbitration &
Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”), has been updated,
among other times, in 2015, 2019 and 2021 to underscore the
significance of prompt dispute settlement. Minimizing judicial
interference with the arbitration process is one of the Act's
core principles.1 Nevertheless, in the process of
“clarifying” the Act, different courts have construed
these clauses in different ways, creating contradictory precedents
and necessitating a merit-based review of each case.
Appointment through a Judicial Lens – Prima Facie
Approach vs. Expanding Horizons
Unquestionably, there are situations where the court's
supervisory jurisdiction is necessary. Appointment of arbitrators
under Section 11 of the Act is one such circumstance. The Amendment
of 2015 inserted Section 11(6A) which required the competent court
acting under Section 11 to confine its examination to
“the existence of an arbitration agreement”.
The Supreme Court in D
