Arbitration is often chosen because it promises speed, flexibility, and freedom from lengthy court battles.
But what happens when parties agree to arbitrate and then disagree on who should act as the arbitrator?
This is where Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 steps in.
Section 11 plays a crucial role in ensuring that arbitration does not fail at the very first step, the appointment of the arbitrator.
What is Section 11 All About?
In simple terms, Section 11 deals with the appointment of arbitrators when parties are unable to do so themselves.
Ideally, parties appoint an arbitrator according to the procedure mentioned in their arbitration agreement. However, when:
- One party refuses to cooperate,
- There is a deadlock between the parties, or
- The agreed procedure breaks down,
The law allows the courts to step in and ensure the arbitration process continues.
Who Appoints the Arbitrator Under Section 11?
Under Section 11, the High Court or the Supreme Court has the power to appoint an arbitrator:
- High Court: For domestic arbitration and international commercial arbitration seated in India
- Supreme Court: For international commercial arbitration seated outside India
The courts may appoint the arbitrator directly or through designated arbitral institutions.
When Can a Party Approach the Court?
A party can approach the court under Section 11 when:
- The other party fails to appoint an arbitrator within 30 days of receiving a request
- Two appointed arbitrators fail to agree on a presiding arbitrator
- The appointment procedure agreed upon in the contract fails
The idea is simple: arbitration should not come to a halt just because parties cannot agree on the appointment.
Scope of Court’s Power
One of the most important developments under Section 11 is the limited role of courts.
After the 2015 Amendment, courts are required to examine only one thing:
Whether a valid arbitration agreement exists
Courts are not supposed to examine the merits of the dispute or decide who is right or wrong. This ensures:
- faster appointment of arbitrators
- minimal judicial interference
- respect for party autonomy
This principle was strongly affirmed by the Supreme Court in Duro Felguera v. Gangavaram Port Ltd.
Independence and Impartiality of Arbitrators
Section 11 must be read along with Section 12, which ensures that arbitrators are:
- independent
- impartial
- free from conflicts of interest
Courts now carefully avoid appointing arbitrators who may fall under the Seventh Schedule, which lists relationships that make a person ineligible to act as an arbitrator.
Time-Bound Appointments
To avoid delays, the law requires that an application under Section 11 should be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 60 days.
This reflects the broader objective of the Arbitration Act—speedy dispute resolution.
Why Section 11 is So Important
Without Section 11:
- A reluctant party could block arbitration indefinitely
- Arbitration clauses would lose their effectiveness
- parties would be forced back into litigation
Section 11 ensures that arbitration agreements are respected and enforced, even when cooperation breaks down.
Conclusion
Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 acts as a safety valve for the arbitration process.
It ensures that disagreements over the appointment of arbitrators do not derail dispute resolution altogether.
Follow Mahamana News For More
