SC flags gaps in arbitration law, urges changes to 2024 amendment Bill

Taking note of the Arbitration and Conciliation Bill, 2024, a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, remarked that it fails to address a long-standing legislative vacuum

Supreme Court, SC
The Supreme Court made these observations in an appeal challenging a July 2024 decision by the Delhi High Court in an arbitration matter. (Photo: PTI)
Rahul Goreja New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : May 02 2025 | 10:09 PM IST
The Supreme Court on Friday expressed its concern over continued absence of statutory clarity in the arbitration regime in the country even after nearly thirty years since the 1996 Act was enacted.
 
Taking note of the Arbitration and Conciliation Bill, 2024, a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, remarked that it fails to address a long-standing legislative vacuum, reported Bar and Bench.
 
"It is indeed very sad to note that even after these many years, procedural issues such as the one involved in the case at hand, have continued to plaque the arbitration regime of India," the court noted.
 
"What is expressly missing in the Act, 1996 is still missing in the Arbitration and Conciliation Bill, 2024, despite a catena of decisions of this court as well as the various high courts, highlighting the need for statutory recognition of such power in order to obviate all possibilities of confusion," the bench added.
 
The bill is currently under consideration of the ministry of law and justice.
 
The court further urged the department of legal affairs under the ministry to take a serious look at the current arbitration regime in India and bring about necessary changes while the Arbitration and Conciliation Bill, 2024 is still being considered.
 
The apex court made these observations in an appeal challenging a July 2024 decision by the Delhi High Court in an arbitration matter. The High Court had upheld the arbitral tribunal’s decision dismissing the appellant firm’s objection to its impleadment in arbitral proceedings, despite it being a non-signatory to the arbitration agreement.
  (With inputs from Bar & Bench and PTI.)
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Topics :Supreme CourtArbitrationBS Web Reports

First Published: May 02 2025 | 9:59 PM IST

Next Story