Jagdeep Chowgule v. Sheela Chowgule 2026 INSC 92 - S.29A Arbitration Act - Court Definition
Application For Extending Time Of HC Appointed Arbitral Tribunal Should Be Filed Before Which Court? SC Clarifies
You can read our notes on this judgment in our Supreme Court Daily Digests. If you are our subscriber, you should get it in our Whatsapp CaseCiter Community at about 9pm on every working day. If you are not our subscriber yet, you can register by clicking here:
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 2(1)(e), 11, 29A - If an arbitral tribunal - appointed by the High Court or by the parties concerned – does not complete proceedings within the required or extended time limit, can an application to extend time under Section 29A of the Act can be filed before the High Court or the Civil Court? The extension of mandate or substitution of an arbitrator under Section 29A does not partake the character of “appointment” under Section 11, but is a measure designed to ensure timely conclusion of arbitration -The expression “Court” in Section 29A must, therefore, be accorded the meaning assigned to it under Section 2(1)(e).(Para 23) The view that there will be hierarchical difficulties, conflict of power or jurisdictional anomaly if a Civil Court entertains application under Section 29A for extension of time of an arbitral tribunal if the High Court under Section 11(6) of the Act has appointed the arbitrator(s) is untenable. (Para 20)
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, particularly Sections 11 - The enquiry under Section 11 is confined to a prima facie determination of the existence of an arbitration agreement. The enquiry under Section 11 goes no further. (Para 14) Exercise of jurisdiction under Section 11 stands exhausted upon the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. There is no residual supervisory or controlling power left with the High Court or the Supreme Court over the arbitral proceedings after appointment is made. The referral Court becomes functus officio once appointment has been made, it has no role or function as a Subjudice Sentinel. (Para 15)
Interpretation of Statutes - A defined term must ordinarily bear the meaning assigned to it “unless the context otherwise require (Para 21)
Case Info
Case name: Jagdeep Chowgule v. Sheela Chowgule & Ors.
Neutral citation: 2026 INSC 92
Coram:Justice Pamidighantam Sri NarasimhaJustice R. Mahadevan
Judgment date: 29 January 2026 (New Delhi)
Statutes / laws referred:Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, particularly Sections 2(1)(e), 9, 11 (including 11(2), 11(4), 11(5), 11(6), 11(6A)), 14, 16, 28, 29A (sub‑sections (1)–(9)), 31, 42, 47, 57.Arbitration Act, 1940 (First Schedule and Section 28 – referred to in background).Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (only in context of later precedent).Constitution of India (Articles 129, 131–139, 225–228, 230 – referred illustratively in Antulay).Law Commission of India 176th Report (para 2.21.5) – on time limits and extension of mandate.
Caselaws and citations referred:
- SBP & Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd., (2005) 8 SCC 618
- Duro Felguera SA v. Gangavaram Port Ltd., (2017) 9 SCC 729
- Interplay Between Arbitration Agreement under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 and the Indian Stamp Act 1899 In re, (2024) 6 SCC 1
- SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd v. Krish Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., (2024) 12 SCC 1
- A.P. Power Generation Corporation Ltd. v. TECPRO Systems Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2851
- Kamal Gupta v. L.R. Builder, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1691
- Rohan Builders (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Berger Paints India Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2494
- State of West Bengal v. Associated Contractors, (2015) 1 SCC 32
- A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602
- State of Jharkhand & Ors. v. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd., (2018) 2 SCC 602
- Guru Nanak Foundation v. Rattan Singh & Sons, (1981) 4 SCC 634
- Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhry, 1957 SCR 488 : AIR 1957 SC 540
- Kumbha Mawji v. Union of India, 1953 SCR 878 : AIR 1953 SC 313
- Union of India v. Surjeet Singh Atwal, (1969) 2 SCC 211
- Rodemadan India Ltd. v. International Trade Expo Centre Ltd., (2006) 11 SCC 651
- Pandey & Co. Builders (P) Ltd. v. State of Bihar, (2007) 1 SCC 467
- P. Kasilingam v. P.S.G. College of Technology, 1995 Supp (2) SCC 348
- K.V. Muthu v. Angamuthu Ammal, (1997) 2 SCC 53
- Nimet Resources Inc. & Anr. v. Essar Steels Ltd., (2009) 17 SCC 313
- Chief Engineer (NH) PWD (Roads) v. BSC & C and C JV, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1801
High Court decisions discussed (streams of conflicting views under Section 29A):
- Mormugao Port Trust v. Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd., WP No. 3 of 2020 (Bombay High Court at Goa)
- M/s A’Xykno Capital Services Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P., 2023 SCC OnLine All 2991
- Dr. V.V. Subbarao v. Dr. Appa Rao Mukkamala & Ors., 2024 SCC OnLine AP 1668
- Nilesh Ramanbhai Patel v. Bhanubhai Ramanbhai Patel, 2018 SCC OnLine Guj 5017
- Cabra Instalaciones y Servicios v. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 1437
- DDA v. Tara Chand Sumit Construction Co., 2020 SCC OnLine Del 2501
- Amit Kumar Gupta v. Dipak Prasad, 2021 SCC OnLine Cal 2174
- Magnus Opus IT Consulting Pvt. Ltd. v. Artcad Systems, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 2861
- Indian Farmers Fertilizers Cooperative Ltd. v. Manish Engineering Enterprises, 2022 SCC OnLine All 150
- Best Eastern Business House Pvt. Ltd. v. Mina Pradhan, 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 7997 (mentioned twice)
- Ovington Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. Bindiya Naga, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 8765
- K.I.P.L. Vistacore Infra Projects J.V. v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ichalkaranji, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 327
- M/s Geo Miller Company Pvt. Ltd. v. U.P. Jal Nigam & Ors., 2024 SCC OnLine All 1676
- M/s Premco Rail Engineering Ltd. v. Indian Institute of Technology, Indore, Arbitration Case No. 88 of 2025 (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
- Mormugao Port Trust v. Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd., WP No. 3 of 2020 (Bombay High Court at Goa) – again in narrative.
