Termination of proceedings
Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 deals with termination of proceedings. The arbitral proceedings shall be terminated by the final arbitral award or by an order of the arbitral tribunal under sub-section (2). The Act came into force on 22 Aug 1996.
(1) The arbitral proceedings shall be terminated by the final arbitral award or by an order of the arbitral tribunal under sub-section (2).
(2) The arbitral tribunal shall issue an order for the termination of the arbitral proceedings where—
(a) the claimant withdraws his claim, unless the respondent objects to the order and the arbitral tribunal recognises a legitimate interest on his part in obtaining a final settlement of the dispute,
(b) the parties agree on the termination of the proceedings, or
(c) the arbitral tribunal finds that the continuation of the proceedings has for any other reason become unnecessary or impossible.
(3) Subject to section 33 and sub-section (4) of section 34, the mandate of the arbitral tribunal shall terminate with the termination of the arbitral proceedings.
Section 32, The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act 26 of 1996).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Dani Wooltex Corporation vs Sheil Properties Private Limited
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The power under clause (c) of subsection (2) of Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, can be exercised only when the Arbitral Tribunal records its satisfaction based on material on record that the continuation of proceedings has become unnecessary or impossible. Abandonment of a claim can be a ground to invoke this power, but abandonment cannot be readily inferred. Abandonment can be express or implied, but implied abandonment requires admitted or proved facts that are so clinching and convincing that the only inference which can be drawn is of abandonment. Mere failure of a claimant to request the Arbitral Tribunal to fix a date for hearing, per se, is no ground to conclude that the proceedings have become unnecessary or that the claim has been abandoned. It is the Arbitral Tribunal's duty to fix meetings and hearing dates, and it cannot abdicate this duty by requiring parties to request such dates. The Arbitral Tribunal cannot exercise its power under Section 32(2)(c) casually or without proper factual foundation, as doing so would defeat the very object of the Arbitration Act.
On this section: Termination of arbitration proceedings; provides four grounds for termination including final award, claimant withdrawal, party agreement, or when continuation becomes unnecessary or impossible
-
Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited vs Tuff Drilling Private Limited
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An arbitral tribunal which has terminated proceedings under Section 25(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 due to non-filing of claim by the claimant retains jurisdiction to consider an application for recall of the order terminating the proceedings if the claimant shows sufficient cause. The tribunal does not become functus officio after passing an order under Section 25(a). The phrase 'where without showing sufficient cause' in Section 25(a) contemplates that sufficient cause can be shown either before or after the termination order is passed. If sufficient cause is shown, the arbitral tribunal can accept the statement of claim and permit the claimant to file the claim even after the time fixed under Section 23(1) has expired. The principles underlying Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 can be invoked by the arbitral tribunal to recall orders passed under Section 25(a) on sufficient cause being shown. The non-use of the phrase 'the mandate of the arbitral tribunal shall terminate' in Section 25(a), as opposed to its use in Section 32(3), indicates that the legislature intended that if the claimant shows sufficient cause, the proceedings can be re-commenced.
On this section: Termination of proceedings by final arbitral award or by order of tribunal; distinguished from Section 25(a) as Section 32(3) provides mandate of tribunal terminates with termination of proceedings, whereas Section 25(a) does not contain such language
-
P. Radha Bai vs P. Ashok Kumar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 17 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is expressly excluded from application to Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The express exclusion is inferred from the language of Section 34(3), particularly the phrase 'but not thereafter' which creates an absolute outer boundary of 120 days for challenging arbitral awards. This exclusion is also necessarily implied from the scheme and object of the Arbitration Act, which is to provide speedy dispute resolution with finality and certainty of awards. Once a party receives an arbitral award, the three-month limitation period commences, and subsequent fraud or mistake by the other party cannot defer the commencement of this period or extend the outer 120-day boundary. The principle of 'unbreakability' of the limitation period, enshrined in the UNCITRAL Model Law, precludes any extension beyond the prescribed period.
On this section: Termination of arbitral proceedings; follows after delivery of award
-
Usha Chatrath v. J.B. Kohli
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Arbitral proceedings terminate by the Final Arbitral Award under s.32(1); subject to s.33 and s.34(4), the tribunal’s mandate ends under s.32(3). Once a Final Award is passed (here, an order that partition properties must be sold), the arbitrator cannot reopen or modify it merely because parties continued to appear; post-award residual power is confined to s.33 correction/additional award or court-ordered remittal under s.34(4).
On this section: Direct teaching on empty Arb §32 termination of proceedings and the functus officio consequence — residual gateway limited to s.33/s.34(4).
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 32
What have the courts held on Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act?
Dani Wooltex Corporation vs Sheil Properties Private Limited (16 May 2024) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Termination of arbitration proceedings; provides four grounds for termination including final award, claimant withdrawal, party agreement, or when continuation becomes unnecessary or impossible. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, 3 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2017 to 2024.
How do I find court cases under Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Arbitration Act 32, section 32 Arbitration Act, section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. People searching for it also type arbitration act section 32 2 and arbitration act 1996 section 32. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 4 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Dani Wooltex Corporation vs Sheil Properties Private Limited (16 May 2024).
What should I read with Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 33 (Correction and interpretation of award; additional award), section 34 (Application for setting aside arbitral awards), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it.
When did Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act come into force?
Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, cited as Arbitration Act 32, came into force on 22 Aug 1996, having been enacted on 16 Aug 1996. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 8. Power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement1029 words
- 11. Appointment of arbitrators1027 words
- 34. Application for setting aside arbitral awards861 words
- 2. Definitions732 words
- 29A. Time limit for arbitral award635 words
- 57. Conditions for enforcement of foreign awards519 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.