Commercial Arbitration in India 2025: What Has Changed and What Still Needs To

Indian arbitration has undergone more reform in the past decade than in the previous five decades. The 2015, 2019, and 2021 amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 have addressed the most significant structural problems — the overuse of Section 34 challenges, the delay in appointing arbitrators, and the length of arbitral proceedings. The question is whether the reforms have achieved their objectives. **What Has Improved** **1. Arbitrator Appointment Speed** The 2015 amendment introduced a 60-day timeline for courts to appoint arbitrators under Section 11. In practice, the Supreme Court Arbitration Bench and the High Courts have substantially improved the speed of appointment — most Section 11 applications are decided within 3-6 months, compared to years under the pre-2015 regime. **2. Timelines for Proceedings** The 2019 amendment introduced a 12-month timeline for domestic arbitrations, extendable by 6 months with party consent. This has created a culture of case management that did not exist before. **3. Emergency Arbitrator** The 2019 amendment introduced emergency arbitrator proceedings, allowing parties to seek urgent interim relief from an emergency arbitrator before the tribunal is constituted. This is now available for institutional arbitrations. **4. Qualification Standards for Arbitrators** The 8th Schedule to the Act, introduced in 2019, prescribes qualifications for arbitrators and creates a framework for an Arbitration Council of India to grade arbitral institutions. **What Remains Challenging** **1. Section 34 Challenges** Despite the narrow grounds of challenge under Section 34, challenges to arbitral awards continue to be filed routinely and take 2-5 years to resolve at the High Court level. The "public policy" ground remains broadly interpreted. **2. Enforcement of Foreign Awards** Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the New York Convention continues to face judicial challenges that can take years, particularly where public policy objections are raised. **3. Court Intervention Under Section 9** Applications for interim relief under Section 9 before the tribunal is constituted are adjudicated by courts — and the court process, with its appeals, can take years. **Practical Recommendations** 1. **Choose institutional over ad hoc arbitration** — DIAC (Delhi International Arbitration Centre), MCIA, and SIAC provide rules, case management, and administrative support that dramatically improve the efficiency of arbitral proceedings 2. **Seat selection matters** — the seat determines the supervisory court and the applicable law for challenge. Delhi, Mumbai, and Singapore are the most commonly chosen seats 3. **Draft the arbitration clause carefully** — a clause that specifies the institution, the number of arbitrators, the seat, and the law is significantly more effective than a bare clause 4. **Use arbitration clauses even in domestic contracts** — the improvement in Indian arbitration means that a well-drafted domestic arbitration clause provides faster and more expert dispute resolution than commercial courts for most categories of disputes