The Madras High Court Arbitrator Pronounce Award Reserved Matter ruling confirms that an arbitrator can issue an award after reserving a dispute for orders. The Court held that later events do not affect this authority. These events include a party’s failure to submit promised documents or its lawyer’s withdrawal.
Arbitrator Can Proceed After Reserving The Matter
The Madras High Court held that an arbitral tribunal can pronounce its award after concluding the hearings.
Once the tribunal reserves the matter, the arbitrator can decide the dispute using the records already available.
The Court also held that the arbitrator need not seek fresh consent from the respondent. The respondent’s counsel withdrawing a vakalat does not change this position.
Justice K. Kumaresh Babu delivered the ruling.
Section 9 Arbitration Application
The ruling arose from a Section 9 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The case involved Vatchala Kanagasabapathy and Anr v. M/s Eros Theater Shantha Sundaram Mahal and Ors [Arb. Appln No. 1688 of 2025].
The applicants held a 26% share in a partnership firm. They sought an order directing two partners to deposit rental arrears.
The applicants claimed that the partners had collected rent from firm assets since 1993. They also sought the deposit of ongoing monthly rental collections.
Arbitrator’s Communication To The Court
During the proceedings, the High Court considered a written communication from the sole arbitrator dated July 1, 2026.
The arbitrator confirmed that the parties had completed oral arguments. The tribunal had then reserved the matter for the final award.
The respondents’ advocate had earlier agreed to produce additional documents. However, the advocate never submitted those documents.
The arbitrator later followed up with the advocate. The advocate stated that he had returned all case papers to the respondents on November 18, 2024.
The arbitrator said that the respondents had not promptly informed the tribunal about this development.
The arbitrator also informed the High Court that he had prepared the final award. He was ready to pronounce it.
Withdrawal Of Vakalat Does Not Stop Award
Justice Kumaresh Babu held that the advocate’s withdrawal after the tribunal reserved the matter did not prejudice the respondents.
The arbitrator could decide the dispute based on the pleadings and evidence already available.
The Court also found that the Section 9 application concerned the same subject matter as the arbitration. The applicants had sought orders relating to rental collections and arrears.
Therefore, the Court held that the arbitrator could pronounce the award without further procedural delay.
The Madras High Court Arbitrator Pronounce Award Reserved Matter ruling confirms that an arbitrator’s authority continues after reserving a dispute for orders.
Section 9 Application Closed
Since the arbitrator could issue the final award, the High Court found no need to pass separate orders on the interim application.
The Court therefore closed the Section 9 application.
In Vatchala Kanagasabapathy and Anr v. M/s Eros Theater Shantha Sundaram Mahal and Ors [2026 LLBiz HC(MAD) 186], Advocate R. Subramanian represented the applicants.
Advocate P.J. Sri Ganesh represented the respondents.
