Force Majeure Interpretation and Unilateral Appointment: Pre-2015 Amendment Arbitration Award Upheld

1. Case Snapshot

• Case Name: Ramasethu Infrastructure Pvt Ltd vs Indian Railways Welfare Organisation

• High Court: High Court of Delhi

• Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

• Date of Decision: July 22, 2026

• Area of Law: Arbitration – Section 34 and Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Force Majeure; Contract Interpretation

2. Judgment in Brief

The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act challenging the dismissal of a Section 34 petition. The appellant-contractor sought to invoke the force majeure clause due to resident protests and a court stay order. The Arbitral Tribunal held that the force majeure clause was not attracted as the alleged hostility lasted only 40 days (not the required 90 days) and the subsequent court stay period did not qualify as a force majeure event. The Single Judge upheld the award, and the Division Bench affirmed, holding that the Arbitrator's interpretation was plausible and not perverse. The Court also rejected the appellant's objection regarding unilateral appointment, noting that the arbitration commenced in 2013, prior to the 2015 Amendment, which applies prospectively.

3. Relevant Facts

• The appellant was awarded a contract for construction of 140 dwelling units on December 27, 2011, with a 24-month completion period.

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.