Supreme Court: High Court lacks power to extend arbitrator’s mandate under Section 29A

The Supreme Court, comprising Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar, dismissed the appeals filed by South Bihar Power Distribution Company (the appellant) against India Power Corporation Ltd (the respondent), holding that the High Court had no authority to extend the arbitrator’s mandate under Section 29A of the Arbitration Act, 1996.

The parties had entered into a franchise agreement that required disputes to be referred to a three‑member arbitral tribunal. A sole arbitrator was subsequently appointed, and the High Court later extended his mandate by six months. The appellant challenged this extension, arguing that the statutory requirement of a three‑member tribunal could not be waived and that only the principal civil court of original jurisdiction could order a time‑extension under Section 29A(4).

Applying Section 2(1)(e) and Section 42 of the Arbitration Act, together with precedents such as Associated Contractors, Jagdeep Chowgule and C. Velusamy, the Court concluded that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to extend the arbitrator’s term. It affirmed that the appellant’s conduct amounted to a waiver of the three‑member tribunal requirement. Consequently, the district court’s six‑month extension remained effective, the arbitrator was directed to render the award within six weeks, and no costs were awarded to either party.

Read the judgment and its head note on DLJ: South Bihar Power Distribution Company ... vs India Power Corporation Ltd (2026 INSC 1165).