Section 29A Arbitration Act: Supreme Court Clarifies Extension and Jurisdiction
Section 29A of the Arbitration Act introduced strict timelines to improve arbitration efficiency in India. Specifically, the 2015 Amendment, effective from 23 October 2015, ensured time-bound dispute resolution.
Under this provision, an arbitral tribunal must deliver an award within 12 months after completing pleadings. Additionally, parties can extend this period by 6 months through mutual consent. However, beyond this 18-month limit, the tribunal’s mandate automatically terminates unless the court grants an extension.
Therefore, although the framework appears simple, it raises practical challenges regarding jurisdiction, timing, and retrospective applicability. Recently, the Supreme Court has clarified these issues, thereby reshaping arbitration practice.
Table of Contents
Jurisdiction Under Section 29A Arbitration Act
Which Court Can Extend the Arbitral Mandate?
Initially, courts differed on whether parties should approach the appointing High Court under Section 11 or the court defined under Section 2(1)(e). Consequently, this created confusion in arbitration proceedings.
However, the Supreme Court in Jagdeep Chowgule v. Sheela Chowgule (2026) resolved this issue. It clearly held that:
- The competent court is the Principal Civil Court or Commercial Court
- Alternatively, the High Court with original jurisdiction can act
- Importantly, the appointing court under Section 11 does not automatically gain jurisdiction
Moreover, the Court clarified that Section 42 does not apply to Section 11 proceedings. Therefore, parties must approach the appropriate civil or commercial court at the seat of arbitration.
Extension of Time Under Section 29A Arbitration Act
Can Courts Extend Time After Expiry?
Earlier, uncertainty existed regarding whether courts could extend the time after the 18 months. However, the Supreme Court in Rohan Builders v. Berger Paints (2024) clarified that:
- Parties can apply even after expiry
- Courts retain the power to revive the arbitral mandate
Thus, the Court adopted a practical approach instead of a rigid interpretation.
Role of Arbitrator Substitution
Subsequently, in Mohanlal Fatehpuria v. Bharat Textiles (2025), the Court added further clarity. It held that:
- After expiry, the mandate technically ends
- However, courts can extend time and substitute arbitrators if necessary
Therefore, courts now play a supervisory role to ensure fairness and efficiency.
Extension Even After Award
Furthermore, in C. Velusamy v. K. Indhera (2026), the Supreme Court expanded flexibility. It ruled that:
- Courts can grant an extension even after the award is passed
- However, such an award remains unenforceable until validated
As a result, Section 29A of the Arbitration Act acts as a remedial provision, not a punitive one.
Retrospective Effect of Section 29A Arbitration Act
Importantly, Section 29A of the Arbitration Act applies retrospectively from 23 October 2015. Therefore, even ongoing arbitrations at that time must comply with the timeline requirements.
At the same time, the Court emphasised a balanced approach. Instead of strictly penalising delays, it promotes efficient and fair dispute resolution.
Practical Implications for Practitioners
Key Takeaways
- Choose the correct forum: File applications before commercial or civil courts
- Act proactively: Although extensions are flexible, early filing reduces risks
- Use strategy: Seek extension instead of directly challenging delayed awards
Additionally, these rulings encourage a more structured arbitration process while preserving party autonomy.
Conclusion: Evolving Role of Section 29A Arbitration Act
Overall, recent Supreme Court judgments have transformed the Section 29A Arbitration Act into a flexible and practical tool. Instead of acting as a strict deadline mechanism, it now ensures procedural fairness while maintaining efficiency.
Therefore, practitioners must understand both the statutory framework and judicial interpretation to effectively navigate arbitration proceedings.
Explore our arbitration legal services to ensure timely and enforceable outcomes.
