Section 32 of The Arbitration Act

Arbitrator does not do pro bono work. For him, it is a professional assignment. Arbitrator who accepts an appointment cannot say, he will not fix a meeting to conduct Arbitral Proceedings or a hearing date unless parties request him to do so. It is duty of an Arbitral Tribunal to do so.

Section 32 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for termination of Arbitral Proceedings. A mere absence in proceedings or failure to participate does not, per se, amount to abandonment. In present facts, there was no abandonment either express or implied. Such a finding could never have been rendered on material before Arbitral Tribunal. If power under Section 32(2)(c) is exercised casually, it will defeat very object of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Hon’ble Justice Abhay S. Oka, Dani Wooltex Corporation v. Shell Properties Pvt. Ltd., [Civil Appeal No. 6462 of 2024]. 

_____

Arbitration is often a friend in conferences but a foe in practice. In practice, Arbitration has at times become more cumbersome than civil litigation.”

Hon’ble Justice R. Mahadevan, Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. v. Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Limited,, 2025 INSC 1365.

We are tempted to preface our Judgment with above quoted observations of this Court.

Only Sections 25(a), Section 30(2), Section 32 and Section 38 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 speak of termination of Arbitral Proceedings by an Arbitrator. Sections 25(a), 30 and 38 merely enumerate different circumstances in which an Arbitral Tribunal would be empowered to take recourse to Section 32(2) and terminate Arbitral Proceedings.

We are unable to agree with views expressed by this Court in SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd. v. Tuff Drilling, (2018) 11 SCC 470 and Sai Babu v. M/s Clariya Steels Pvt. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 4956 of 2019 insofar as they hold, termination of proceedings under Sections 25(a) and 32(2) are distinct from one another.

Hon’ble Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Harshbir Singh Pannu v. Jaswinder Singh, [Civil Appeal No. 14630 of 2025] decided on 09.12.2025.