In Short
Arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 lets commercial parties resolve disputes outside court through a tribunal they help select, with limited judicial interference. S&S Co. advises on drafting arbitration clauses, represents clients through the full arbitration lifecycle — appointment, interim relief, hearings, award — and handles post-award proceedings including Section 34 challenges, Section 37 appeals and enforcement, before the Delhi High Court and Calcutta High Court.
What Is Arbitration?
Arbitration is a consensual, private method of dispute resolution in which parties agree — usually in advance, through an arbitration clause in their contract — to refer disputes to one or more arbitrators instead of the ordinary courts. The arbitrator's decision, the award, is final and binding, subject only to a narrow set of grounds on which a court can set it aside. In India, arbitration is governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which draws heavily on the UNCITRAL Model Law and has been amended several times — most significantly in 2015, 2019 and through ongoing legislative reform — to reduce judicial interference and speed up the process.
For businesses in Delhi NCR and Kolkata, arbitration is now the default dispute-resolution mechanism in most commercial contracts, from supply and distribution agreements to EPC contracts, joint venture agreements, and cross-border transactions.
Seat vs. Venue — Why It Matters
One of the most consequential — and most frequently litigated — questions in Indian arbitration is the distinction between the seat and the venue of arbitration. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the seat is the juridical home of the arbitration: it fixes the curial (procedural) law and determines which court has exclusive supervisory jurisdiction over the arbitration, including applications under Sections 9, 34 and 37. The venue, by contrast, is simply the physical location where hearings are convened for convenience, and does not by itself confer or alter jurisdiction — even where hearings are held elsewhere for years.
Poorly drafted arbitration clauses that conflate seat and venue are a leading cause of costly, preliminary jurisdictional litigation. We draft and review arbitration clauses to fix the seat with precision, appropriate to whether the parties intend Delhi, Kolkata, or another seat to govern.
Courts We Appear Before
Delhi High Court — Arbitration jurisdiction
Commercial Courts of Delhi & Gautam Buddh Nagar
Calcutta High Court — Arbitration jurisdiction
Arbitral institutions (ad hoc & institutional)
Supreme Court of India — Section 11/34/37 matters
Foreign-seated tribunals (advisory & enforcement)
Our Arbitration Services
- Arbitration clause drafting & review — fixing seat, venue, governing law, institutional rules and arbitrator-appointment mechanisms to avoid future jurisdictional disputes.
- Section 11 appointment applications — securing constitution of the tribunal where a counterparty refuses to cooperate.
- Interim relief under Section 9 (court-ordered) and Section 17 (tribunal-ordered) to preserve assets, restrain breach, or secure the subject matter pending the award.
- Representing clients in arbitral proceedings — pleadings, evidence, cross-examination and final submissions before ad hoc and institutional tribunals.
- Section 34 challenges to set aside awards on grounds such as patent illegality, conflict with public policy, or the tribunal exceeding its jurisdiction.
- Section 37 appeals from orders under Sections 9, 17 and 34.
- Enforcement of domestic and foreign awards, including awards under the New York Convention.
The Arbitration Process
-
Notice & Appointment
We issue or respond to a notice invoking arbitration, and where needed, move a Section 11 application to secure appointment of the tribunal.
-
Interim Protection
Where the dispute requires urgent protection of assets or the status quo, we seek interim relief under Section 9 (before the court) or Section 17 (before the tribunal once constituted).
-
Pleadings & Hearings
We prepare statements of claim/defence, marshal documentary and witness evidence, and represent clients through hearings before the tribunal.
-
Award
Following final submissions, the tribunal renders its award — final and binding, subject to the narrow grounds for challenge under Section 34.
-
Post-Award: Challenge or Enforcement
Depending on outcome, we either defend the award through enforcement proceedings or pursue a Section 34 challenge and, if necessary, a Section 37 appeal.
Illustrative Scenarios
The following are hypothetical, illustrative scenarios prepared for educational purposes. They are not descriptions of actual client matters, and no outcome is guaranteed in any specific case.
Illustrative Scenario
Award Debtor Seeking Interim Protection After an Adverse Award
A Delhi NCR manufacturing company receives an adverse arbitral award and wishes to challenge it under Section 34 while also seeking interim protection against immediate enforcement. Current Supreme Court authority confirms Section 9 relief remains available even post-award, including to the award debtor, provided the request is genuinely aimed at preserving the status quo pending the Section 34 proceeding.
Illustrative Scenario
Enforcing an Award Against a Group Company That Was Not a Signatory
A Kolkata-based trading company holds an award against a counterparty that has since transferred assets to an affiliate under common control. Enforcement courts have shown willingness to pierce the corporate veil and implead such non-signatory affiliates at the execution stage where they demonstrably benefited from the underlying contract, preventing evasion through corporate structuring.
Illustrative Scenario
Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clause Requiring Mediation Before Arbitration
A joint venture agreement between a Noida-based manufacturer and its overseas partner requires mediation before arbitration can be invoked. Skipping the mediation step and filing directly for arbitration risks a jurisdictional objection — properly exhausting each tier in sequence protects the eventual award from a threshold challenge.
Illustrative Scenario
Enforcing a Foreign Arbitral Award Against a Kolkata-Based Counterparty
A foreign supplier holds a New York Convention award against a Kolkata trading company that resists enforcement citing local procedural technicalities. Indian courts have consistently taken a pro-enforcement approach to foreign awards, limiting refusal to the narrow public-policy and due-process grounds under Section 48 — making technical objections alone rarely sufficient to resist enforcement.
Notable Judgments
Supreme Court2026 INSC
M/S Steag Energy Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. GSPC Pipavav Power Company Ltd.
Courts Must Exercise Restraint Reviewing Technical Tender & Contract-Award Decisions
Ruling on an O&M contract dispute for a gas-based power plant, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court's interference, holding that evaluation and award of complex technical contracts falls within the domain of the procuring authority and the competence of technical evaluators. Judicial interference is confined to cases of clear illegality, mala fides or irrationality.
Key Takeaway — Infrastructure, energy and EPC clients challenging or defending a tender award should frame grounds around illegality or perversity — courts will not re-run a technical evaluation on the merits.
Supreme CourtMay 26, 2026
Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. Saryu Plastics Pvt. Ltd.
Participation in Proceedings Without Objection Waives Challenge to Arbitrator's Mandate
Justices Narasimha and Alok Aradhe upheld the validity of arbitral proceedings, holding that a party which participates in proceedings before an arbitral tribunal without raising a timely objection cannot subsequently challenge the arbitrator's mandate. The Court treated continued, unobjected participation as effective waiver of any procedural infirmity in the tribunal's constitution.
Key Takeaway — Parties must raise objections to an arbitrator's appointment or mandate at the earliest opportunity — silence coupled with continued participation will be treated as a waiver.
Supreme CourtApr 24, 2026
Home Care Retail Marts Pvt. Ltd. v. Haresh N. Sanghavi
Section 9 Interim Relief Is Available Post-Award, Even to a Non-Award Holder
Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan held that either party to an arbitration may seek interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act at any stage of the proceedings, including after the award is passed. The Court clarified that the expression "a party" in Section 9 draws no distinction between the successful and unsuccessful party, so even a non-award holder may seek interim protection.
Key Takeaway — Award debtors are not without recourse post-award — Section 9 protection remains available to safeguard legitimate interests even after the tribunal has ruled.
Supreme CourtApr 15, 2026
J&K Economic Reconstruction Agency v. Rash Builders India — 2026 INSC 368
Seat of Arbitration Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction — Venue Is Merely a Convenient Location
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the seat of arbitration is the juridical home of the arbitration, fixing the curial law and the court with exclusive supervisory jurisdiction once designated by the parties' agreement — to the exclusion of every other court, even one where part of the cause of action arose. The venue, by contrast, is only a geographical convenience and does not confer, alter, or determine jurisdiction.
Key Takeaway — Drafters must fix the seat with precision in the arbitration clause — once chosen, it alone governs supervisory jurisdiction regardless of where hearings are actually conducted.
See all Legal Updates for this practice area →
Our Approach to Arbitration
- Dedicated arbitration desks in both Delhi NCR and Kolkata, tracking Supreme Court and High Court arbitration jurisprudence continuously.
- End-to-end coverage — from clause drafting through award enforcement — reducing handoff risk between transactional and dispute counsel.
- Founders with 20 years combined experience across commercial litigation, arbitration and regulatory practice.
- Pan-India and cross-border coordination through associate counsel for multi-seat or multi-jurisdiction arbitrations.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between the "seat" and "venue" of arbitration?
The seat is the juridical home of the arbitration — it fixes the curial law and the court with exclusive supervisory jurisdiction. The venue is merely the physical hearing location and does not, by itself, determine supervisory jurisdiction.
Can Indian courts modify an arbitral award?
Following the Supreme Court's 2025 Constitution Bench ruling in Gayatri Balasamy, courts have a limited power to sever invalid portions, correct clerical/computational errors, and adjust post-award interest — but cannot re-evaluate the merits or rewrite the award.
How long do I have to challenge an arbitral award?
A Section 34 application must generally be filed within three months of receiving the award, extendable by a further 30 days on sufficient cause — strictly enforced.
Can a non-signatory to a contract be bound by its arbitration clause?
Yes — under the Group of Companies doctrine, common control, management overlap and integrated performance within a corporate group can bind a non-signatory affiliate, with the tribunal empowered to finally decide the question.