In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court set aside a Single Judge's order appointing an arbitrator in an international commercial arbitration, reaffirming the exclusive authority of the Supreme Court in such matters.
In a landmark decision, the Delhi High Court has annulled the appointment of an arbitrator in an international commercial arbitration case involving August Purple Services Private Limited and Axis Trustee Services Limited. The Division Bench, comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Vinod Kumar, pronounced the judgment on August 20, 2026, emphasizing that the jurisdiction to appoint arbitrators in international commercial arbitration cases lies solely with the Supreme Court of India, as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The case originated from a dispute where a Single Judge had appointed a retired Supreme Court Judge as an arbitrator on July 28, 2026, to adjudicate the disputes. The appointment was challenged by the appellants, August Purple Services Private Limited, on the grounds of jurisdictional overreach, given that one of the involved parties, Ace Turtle Global Pte Ltd, is based in Singapore, qualifying the matter as an international commercial arbitration.
According to Section 2(1)(f) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the definition of international commercial arbitration includes any arbitration where at least one party is a foreign entity. Section 11(6) further delineates that the power to appoint an arbitrator in such cases is reserved exclusively for the Supreme Court.
The court's decision highlighted that the original order of the Single Judge was issued without proper jurisdictional authority, rendering it void. The Division Bench's judgment underscores the procedural importance of following statutory provisions in arbitration cases to prevent jurisdictional conflicts and ensure fair adjudication.
The matter has been remanded to the Single Judge for reconsideration on merits, with directions for all parties to appear on August 25, 2026. The court instructed that the previous observations made in the order dated July 28, 2026, should not influence the fresh proceedings.
This ruling reinforces the structured framework of arbitration laws in India and clarifies the roles of various judicial bodies in international commercial disputes, ensuring that such matters are handled by the Supreme Court, thereby maintaining the integrity of international arbitration protocols.
Bottom Line :
The High Court does not have jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator in an international commercial arbitration as defined under Section 2(1)(f) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Such power is exclusively vested with the Supreme Court under Section 11(6) of the Act.
Statutory provision(s): Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Sections 2(1)(f), 11(6), Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Section 13, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 151, Order XLI Rule 5.
