Madhya Pradesh High Court: No High Court Power to Appoint Arbitrators in International Commercial Disputes
Stories are grouped across languages, rewritten into a fixed editorial format, and linked to original sources. How we report.
TL;DR
- Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled on arbitrator appointments in international commercial disputes.
- The Court held that High Courts do not have the power to appoint arbitrators in such cases.
- The power vests exclusively with the Chief Justice of India or a designated representative.
- The ruling was made in Ssayong v. SB Engineering, an international arbitration context.
Overview
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that in international commercial arbitration cases involving a foreign party, a High Court does not have the authority to appoint an arbitrator. The authority lies solely with the Chief Justice of India or their designate, as clarified in a decision issued in the case of Ssayong v. SB Engineering.
What Happened
On April 24, 2026, the Madhya Pradesh High Court addressed whether it had the authority to appoint an arbitrator in an international commercial dispute under Indian arbitration law.
In the Ssayong v. SB Engineering case, one of the parties involved was a foreign entity.
The Court concluded that, as per the relevant legal provisions, only the Chief Justice of India or a designate can appoint an arbitrator when a foreign party is involved in the arbitration.
As a result, the Madhya Pradesh High Court stated explicitly that High Courts lack jurisdiction for such appointments in the context of international commercial arbitration.
Context
The role of courts in appointing arbitrators in India is governed by distinct provisions depending on whether the dispute is domestic or international in nature.
The ruling reiterates the separation of authority over international commercial arbitration appointments, aligning with statutory interpretation.
Why It Matters
- This ruling clarifies the scope of powers held by Indian High Courts regarding arbitrator appointments in international commercial arbitration.
- The decision emphasizes the exclusive role of the Chief Justice of India or their designate in such matters, which may affect the procedural handling of cross-border disputes.