Arbitration And The Courts: Judicial Views On Article 29A
- IJLLR Journal
- Oct 15
- 1 min read
Devansh Saxena, University of Allahabad
ABSTRACT
A study of the functioning and issues connected with Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 29A was inserted in 2015 in order to streamline and hasten arbitration in India, by introducing a strict time-limit on submission of an arbitral award. At first glance, the rule appears to be quite uncomplicated; once the pleadings are complete, the tribunal shall submit their arbitral award within a legally prescribed period of 12 months. There is provision for an additional period of 6 months, to which the parties consent. After the lapse of that time, the arbitrator's powers shall have ceased, absent the intervention of the "Court."
In practice, the process has proven to be less than simple. Different High Courts read the section differently; some read the commitment timelines as mandatory and others somewhat more permissive. The meaning of "Court" also became an issue until the Supreme Court stated that it referred the principal civil court having original jurisdiction. The different interpretations produced confusion for arbitrators and parties and led to concerns regarding efficiency, justice and party autonomy.
This study adopts a doctrinal approach, with reference to the legislative framework, the detailed leading cases and with attention to academic commentary. This study argues that, while Section 29A is a step in the right direction, the rigidity contained in the section may act to frustrate the purpose of arbitration altogether.
