In Ankhim Holdings Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Zaveri Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2026 INSC 137, decided 4 February 2026), the parties approached the High Court for appointment of a substitute arbitrator under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. One party had been under an insolvency moratorium during part of the proceedings, and the High Court declared the earlier arbitral proceedings a nullity on that basis.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction. An application for a substitute arbitrator does not permit the court to set aside or annul what the tribunal has already done; in doing so, the High Court had effectively acted as an appellate court. The proper course was to appoint a substitute arbitrator so the proceedings could continue.
Why it matters: insolvency events are increasingly common in long-running commercial arbitrations. This ruling keeps the court's role on a substitution application narrow — replace the arbitrator, not relitigate the arbitration.
The practical takeaway: if a counterparty enters insolvency during an arbitration, take specific advice on the moratorium's effect on the claim itself, but do not assume the work already done in the arbitration is automatically lost.
This note summarises the reported judgment for general information and is not legal advice on any specific matter.