Case:- M/s. KNR Tirumala Infra Pvt. Ltd. vs National Highways Authority of India.
Citation:- ARB. P. NO. 1733/2024
Date:- 29.08.2025
Delhi High Court Bench: Justice Jasmeet Singh
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that when the panel of arbitrators from which appointments are to be made is broad-based, comprising retired Supreme Court Judges and other eminent officials, and is independent, not controlled by any party, the other party cannot refuse to abide by the institutional rules it has consciously agreed to, on the ground that the panel is not impartial.
Key Takeaways:-
- The Hon’ble Delhi High Court dealt with a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
- The petitioner wanted to appoint its own arbitrator outside the Society for Affordable Redressal of Disputes (SAROD) panel, arguing it was not a SAROD member and should not be forced to choose from its list. The respondent opposed, citing the Agreement (Clause 38.3) and SAROD Rules (Rule 11.4) which require arbitrators to be chosen only from the SAROD panel.
- The Hon’ble Court noted that SAROD had amended its rules and its membership is not mandatory, even the non-members can invoke arbitration and participate.
- The Hon’ble Court compared this with the CORE Case decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, where the panel was controlled by Railways and biased. Unlike that, The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that the SAROD panel is independent and broad-based.
- SAROD’s panel includes 92 arbitrators, such as former Supreme Court and High Court judges, retired bureaucrats, NHRC members, engineers, and financial experts, ensuring impartiality.
- The Hon’ble Court held that once parties have agreed to SAROD arbitration, they cannot cherry-pick rules or bypass the appointment process.
Result: Petition dismissed; parties must stick to SAROD arbitration rules.
