Arbitrator’s Interim Order is not Interim Award for Section 34 Petition

Judgment dated 12.5.2026 of the High Court of Delhi of Cinda Engineering and Construction Private Limited  Vs. CY Engineering India Private Limited in O.M.P (COMM) 67/2025.

Delhi HC held that only orders conclusively deciding the substantive rights of the parties during arbitral proceedings can qualify as Interim Award for Section 34 Petition.   In other words, section 34 petition challenging the procedural orders of the Arbitrator passed during arbitral proceedings is not maintainable.

 Arbitrator’s Interim Order is not Interim Award for Section 34 Petition

The Arbitrator had dismissed two applications – one for leave to place additional documents on record and another for leave to amend Statement of Defence and Counter Claim, filed at the stage subsequent to the closure of evidence.

An order assumes the character of an interim award only when the Arbitral Tribunal finally determines a distinct and severable part of the dispute and renders itself functus officio qua such determination. The essential attribute of an interim award is thus the attainment of adjudicatory finality in respect of substantive rights.

To construe every procedural rejection or interlocutory determination as an “interim award” would fundamentally distort the statutory framework governing arbitral proceedings under the A&C Act. Such an interpretation would open the floodgates for continuous judicial intervention against routine procedural orders passed during the course of arbitration, thereby undermining the autonomy of the arbitral process, frustrating the objective of expeditious dispute resolution, and eroding the procedural flexibility that forms the foundational architecture of the Act.

Section 34 of the A&C Act was never intended to serve as a mechanism for appellate scrutiny of every procedural direction or interlocutory order rendered by an Arbitral Tribunal during the conduct of proceedings. The scope of challenge under Section 34 of the A&C Act is confined to arbitral awards, including those interim decisions that conclusively determine substantive rights or liabilities of the parties, and cannot be expanded to encompass procedural orders that merely regulate the manner in which the arbitral proceedings are to be conducted.