An arbitrator’s death terminates the mandate, permitting appointment of a substitute arbitrator.

The petitions were filed under Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking termination of the mandate of the erstwhile sole arbitrator and appointment of a substitute in two DIAC arbitrations.

The earlier arbitrator, Mr. Arun Kumar Jain, died on 23 September 2025 while his mandate—extended by consent under Section 29A(3) until 17 February 2026—was in force.

The Respondents had no objection to appointing Mr. Vinay Kumar Gupta (Retd.), whose name they had also proposed during the appointment process.

The proceedings had reached final arguments.

Whether the mandate of the erstwhile sole arbitrator had terminated following his death.

Whether a substitute sole arbitrator should be appointed, and what directions should govern the continuation and timeframe of the arbitrations.

Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provide for termination of an arbitrator’s mandate where the arbitrator becomes de facto unable to perform the functions of the office, and for appointment of a substitute arbitrator.

Section 29A governs the time limit for making an arbitral award and its extension, while Section 12(2) requires the arbitrator to furnish the requisite disclosures.

The Court also directed that the proceedings continue under the aegis and rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC).

The Court treated the arbitrator’s death during the subsistence of the extended mandate as rendering him de facto unable to perform his functions, with the consequence that his mandate stood terminated.

Since the Respondents consented to the proposed substitute and both parties were ad idem, the Court found that no further adjudication on the appointment question was required.

Given that the proceedings had reached final arguments and time had been consumed securing a replacement, the Court regularised the period from 18 February 2026 to the order date and extended the substitute arbitrator’s mandate by six months from entering upon the reference, subject to Section 29A.

His mandate was extended by six months from that date, subject to Section 29A; the intervening period was regularised, and he was directed to furnish disclosures under Section 12(2) within three weeks of entering the reference.

The petitions and any pending applications were disposed of, with the parties at liberty to raise pleas, including arbitrability and jurisdiction, before the arbitrator.