The Supreme Court of India has clarified that its recent judgment in Mohan Lal Fatehpuria vs. M/s. Bharat Textiles & Ors. was not intended to rewrite the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, or to compel the substitution of an arbitrator in every instance where an extension of the mandate is sought. The
Supreme Court Clarifies Section 29A: Extension of Mandate Does Not Compel Substitution of Arbitrator in Every Case
