Contractual Limits on Arbitral Power: The Supreme Court’s Reconsideration of Bharat Drilling

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, in The State of Jharkhand v. The Indian Builders, Jamshedpur (2025), reopened the question of whether arbitral tribunals may award claims expressly barred by contract. In doing so, it referred Bharat Drilling & Foundation Treatment Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand (2009) to a Larger Bench. This marks a significant development in Indian arbitration jurisprudence, with contractual consent being viewed as the primary source for arbitral jurisdiction. This blog examines the rationale behind Bharat Drilling, situates the referral within the Supreme Court’s evolving emphasis on party autonomy, and reflects on its implications for public procurement and fiscal governance.

Surmises and Consent: Public Policy’s New Work in Foreign Award Enforcement

Over the past decade, Indian courts have repeatedly affirmed a strong pro-enforcement stance towards foreign arbitral awards under Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“The Act”), with a focus on the narrow refusal grounds in Section 48. Against this backdrop, the Madras High Court’s decision in Olam International Ltd. v. Manickavel Edible Oils (P) Ltd. (“Olam”) presents an interesting position. […]