Bombay High Court Affirms Termination Of Arbitrator’s Mandate Under Section 29A Does Not Terminate Arbitral Proceedings And Bars Fresh Appointment Where Applicant Is At Fault.

The High Court of Bombay through its judgement dated 01.04.2026 in Nalin Vallabhbhai Patel & Anr. v. Atharva Realtors and Ors.¹ held that under Section 29A(4) of the A&C Act, it is only the mandate of the arbitrator that stands terminated and not the arbitral proceedings. The High Court clarified that termination of the mandate does not ipso facto result in termination of the arbitral proceedings, and that the statutory scheme clearly recognizes a distinction between termination of mandate and termination of proceedings.

The High Court, upon a conjoint reading of Sections 29A, 14, 15 and 32 of the A&C Act, held that while termination of proceedings is governed by Section 32, Section 29A only results in cessation of the arbitrator’s mandate. It was clarified that the permissibility of a fresh reference or appointment depends on the conduct of the parties.

Footnote

^{1 CARAPL NO. 430 of 2025.}

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.