Chapter IV, sections 16-17, of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 deals with the jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals. Section 16 grants the arbitral tribunal the authority to rule their own jurisdiction. This concept is also referred to as the Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle. It is a German phrase, which means competence-competence. This provision gives power to the arbitral tribunal to address their disputes about its jurisdiction, including challenges to the validity of the arbitration agreement. The object of Section 16 is to empower the tribunal so as to avoid unnecessary court intervention.  

Principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz

Section 16 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act is based on a German principle known as the principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz. By applying this principle, the arbitral tribunal can assess whether it has the authority to arbitrate a particular dispute, even if the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement is in question. 

There are two main components of this principle:

1. The arbitral tribunal has the authority to determine whether it has jurisdiction over the dispute, including the validity of the arbitration agreement.

2. This prevents courts from intervening in jurisdictional matters until the arbitral tribunal has made a ruling on its jurisdiction. Courts only get involved once the arbitration has concluded, ensuring minimal interference during the process.

Concept of Section 16 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act

Section 16 provides self-regulatory mechanisms to the tribunal. This prevents arbitration from being delayed by jurisdictional challenges raised in courts during the arbitration proceedings.

Key Provision of Section 16

1. Section 16(1): Authority to Rule on Jurisdiction 

Under Section 16(1), the arbitral tribunal can rule on any objections regarding the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement, as well as whether the tribunal itself has jurisdiction over the dispute. This includes determining if the contract, in which the arbitration clause is embedded, is valid.

• Independent Arbitration Clause: According to Section 16(1)(a), the arbitration clause within a contract is treated as an independent agreement, separate from the rest of the contract. Even if the contract is declared null and void, this does not automatically invalidate the arbitration clause.

• Nullity of Contract vs. Arbitration Clause: As per Section 16(1)(b), a decision by the arbitral tribunal that the contract is null and void does not render the arbitration clause invalid.

2. Section 16(2): Raising Pleas of Lack of Jurisdiction

 Any plea regarding the tribunal’s lack of jurisdiction must be raised no later than the submission of the statement of defense. A party is not barred from raising such a plea just because they participated in the arbitrator’s appointment.

3. Section 16(3): Plea on Exceeding Authority: If a party believes the tribunal is exceeding its authority, they must raise this objection immediately when the issue arises.

4.  Section 16(4): Admission of Delayed Pleas: It  provides that the tribunal may admit a late plea if it believes the delay is justified

5. Section 16(5): Decision on Pleas: The tribunal, after considering the plea, will either accept or reject it. If the plea is rejected, the tribunal proceeds with the arbitration and renders an award.

6. Section 16(6): Recourse Against Tribunal’s Decision: As outlined in this subsection, a party aggrieved by the arbitral award can apply to set aside the award under Section 34 of the Act.

Are you interested in pursuing a career in Law? The Legal School in collaboration with IndusLaw has created a unique program for a Certification in Mergers & Acquisitions for fresh law graduates as well as professionals looking to advance in their careers! Enquire now for details!

Significance of Section 16 in Arbitration 

The significance of Section 16 under arbitration proceedings cannot be overstated. Following are some major implications of Section 16 on the arbitration –

• One of the main purposes of Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is to reduce court interference in arbitration. By giving the arbitral tribunal the power to rule on its own jurisdiction, the section ensures that jurisdictional disputes do not result in prolonged litigation, which is a common drawback in the traditional legal system.

• Section 16 ensures that arbitration proceedings can continue without being stalled by jurisdictional challenges. This makes the arbitration process efficient and cost-effective.

• Even if a party challenges the tribunal’s jurisdiction under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the arbitration process does not stop. The final award can still be challenged later in court under Section 34 of the Act. This approach ensures that the arbitration reaches a conclusion

• By allowing the tribunal to rule on jurisdiction, Section 16 prevents the typical delays caused by court proceedings. This aligns with the overall objective of arbitration, which is to provide a faster and more flexible method of resolving disputes.

Recent Case Laws in Section 16 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act

Bhaven Construction v. Executive Engineer Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. (2021)

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that challenging the jurisdiction of an arbitrator or tribunal:

• under section 16 of the Act must be determined by the arbitrator or tribunal itself; and

• under Section 34 of the Act can only be done when a final arbitral award has been passed.

Bhaven Construction through Authorized Signatory Premjibhai K. Shah v. Executive Engineer Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. & Anr. (2021),

In this case, the Supreme Court of India made an important ruling regarding Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The case dealt with whether a party could bypass the arbitral tribunal and approach the High Court directly under Article 226 or Article 227 of the Constitution to challenge the tribunal’s jurisdiction. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle  discouraging premature judicial intervention. The tribunal must be the first forum to handle jurisdictional challenges, preserving the efficiency and purpose of arbitration. The same was held in the case of NHAI v. Sayedabad Tea Estate (2020). 

Lion Engineering Consultants v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2018)

The Supreme Court upheld that failure to raise jurisdictional objections under Section 16 during the arbitration proceedings amounted to a waiver of the right to object later.

Conclusion

Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 ensures that arbitration proceedings are not disrupted by jurisdictional challenges. This self-regulatory mechanism allows for faster dispute resolution, minimizes court interference, and upholds the independence of arbitration agreements.

Arbitration & Conciliation ACT, 1996 FAQs

1. What is Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?

Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act allows an arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction, including objections related to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. It follows the principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz, which gives the tribunal the power to decide on its authority.

2. What is the Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act?

The Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle, embedded in Section 16, means that the arbitral tribunal can determine whether it has the jurisdiction to arbitrate a dispute, including resolving any questions regarding the validity of the arbitration agreement.

3. When should a plea challenging the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal be raised under Section 16?

Under Section 16, a party must raise a plea challenging the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal no later than the submission of their statement of defense. If the issue arises during the proceedings, it should be raised as soon as possible.

4. Can a party challenge the arbitral tribunal’s decision on jurisdiction in court during the arbitration?

No, under Section 16, a party cannot directly challenge the tribunal’s jurisdictional decision in court during the arbitration proceedings. They must wait until the final arbitral award is made and then challenge it under Section 34 of the Act.

5. What happens if the arbitral tribunal rejects a plea challenging its jurisdiction under Section 16?

If the arbitral tribunal rejects a plea challenging its jurisdiction under Section 16, it will continue with the arbitration proceedings and issue an arbitral award. The aggrieved party can challenge this decision after the final award is issued, in accordance with Section 34 of the Act.