In Brief
In this case, the Supreme Court clarified when disputes are non-arbitrable under Indian law. The Court held that disputes covered by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) Act cannot be arbitrated because the statute creates exclusive jurisdiction in the DRT and special recovery mechanisms. The Court established a four-fold test for non-arbitrability: whether the statute creates special rights, specifies a particular forum, prescribes special remedies, and prohibits jurisdiction waiver. Importantly, at the referral stage, courts need only do a prima facie review—not a full substantive review—of arbitrability. When facts are debatable, courts must refer matters to arbitration and allow the arbitral tribunal to decide jurisdiction and arbitrability questions, with parties retaining appeal rights.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.