Conduct of Arbitral Proceeding: Section 22 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
Section 22 — Conduct of Arbitral Proceedings
Text of Section 22 (Summarized)
Section 22 provides that subject to the provisions of this Act, the arbitral tribunal shall conduct the arbitration proceedings in such manner as it considers appropriate, ensuring that the parties are treated equally and that each party has a reasonable opportunity to present their case.
Key Points of Section 22:
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Autonomy of the Arbitral Tribunal | The tribunal has the freedom to decide the procedure of the arbitration, including the timing, location, and manner of hearings, evidence, and submissions. This autonomy allows the tribunal to tailor the process to the specifics of the dispute. |
| Party Equality | The tribunal must ensure that both parties are treated equally without discrimination. This is a fundamental principle to maintain fairness in arbitration. |
| Opportunity to Present Case | Both parties must be given a full opportunity to present their evidence, arguments, and submissions. This is essential for natural justice and due process. |
| Subject to the Act | The tribunal's discretion to conduct proceedings is subject to the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, meaning it must comply with mandatory procedural requirements and principles of law. |
| Flexibility & Efficiency | The provision emphasizes a flexible and efficient procedure to avoid unnecessary delays and expense. The tribunal may adopt procedures it deems suitable to achieve a fair and just resolution. |
Interpretation and Scope
Freedom to Conduct Proceedings: Section 22 grants wide procedural freedom to arbitrators, unlike courts which are bound by strict procedural laws.
Natural Justice: Despite procedural freedom, arbitrators must uphold principles of natural justice—fair hearing and equal treatment.
Non-Interference by Courts: Courts generally avoid interfering with how arbitrators conduct proceedings unless there is gross violation of fairness or legal provisions.
Illustrative Case Law on Section 22
Chloro Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. Severn Trent Water Purification Inc., (2013) 1 SCC 641
Issue: Whether the arbitrator can proceed with arbitration in the absence of one party.
Held: The arbitrator has the power under Section 22 to conduct proceedings as they see fit, ensuring fair opportunity to both parties. An arbitrator can continue even if a party withdraws or does not cooperate, provided the non-cooperating party had sufficient opportunity to present its case.
Significance: Affirmed the tribunal’s autonomy to control proceedings and the balance of flexibility with fairness.
SSP Associates vs. National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd., AIR 2015 SC 3671
Issue: Arbitrator's discretion to fix procedure including timelines and modes of evidence.
Held: Section 22 empowers arbitrators with procedural control to conduct proceedings efficiently. Arbitrators need not strictly follow civil procedural law but must ensure fairness.
Significance: Reiterated the importance of procedural autonomy balanced with equality and opportunity.
Kvaerner Cementation India Ltd. v. Bajranglal Agarwal & Ors., AIR 2000 SC 1630
Held: Arbitrators are free to fix their own procedure subject to the statutory framework and natural justice. The court should not interfere lightly in the conduct of arbitral proceedings.
Practical Implications of Section 22:
Flexible Procedure: Arbitrators can decide whether hearings will be oral, written, or both.
Time Management: Arbitrators can set timelines for submissions to avoid unnecessary delay.
Evidence: Arbitrators decide the admissibility and relevance of evidence without being bound by strict rules of evidence applicable in courts.
Venue and Language: Arbitrators may decide on the venue and language of proceedings.
Interim Measures: Although addressed under separate provisions, the tribunal can order interim reliefs as part of managing proceedings.
Summary:
| Aspect | Section 22 Position |
|---|---|
| Procedural Control | Arbitrator has discretion over procedure |
| Equality | Equal treatment of parties mandatory |
| Opportunity to be Heard | Must provide reasonable chance to present case |
| Flexibility | Proceedings can be tailored for efficiency |
| Subject to Act | Cannot violate mandatory provisions or natural justice |
RELATED Blog
0 comments