Arbitrator Appointment Challenges Must Be Raised Before Tribunal, Not In Interim Appeals: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that its role is limited when hearing an appeal against an interim order passed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

At this stage, the court cannot examine whether the arbitrator was properly appointed or has the authority to act.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice S Manu said such objections must be raised before the arbitral tribunal itself.

“Competency of the Arbitral Tribunal is a matter to be raised before the Tribunal by the party having a contention that the Arbitrator is incompetent. Such a contention cannot be considered in this arbitration appeal,” the court said.

The dispute relates to a car loan taken by Athira K S from Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited. After repayment defaults, the lender invoked the arbitration clause in the hypothecation agreement.

It then approached the Additional District Court at Alappuzha under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act seeking repossession of the vehicle. On June 21, 2025, the District Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to repossess the car and hand it over to the lender for preservation.

The court also directed that custody of the vehicle after three months would be subject to the arbitrator's orders.

Athira challenged this order before the High Court. Her counsel said the car had already been repossessed and that arbitration proceedings were pending. He argued that the arbitrator had been appointed unilaterally and was therefore illegal.

The lender opposed the appeal and said all issues relating to custody had to be raised before the arbitrator in view of the District Court's directions.

The High Court refused to interfere. It noted that possession of the vehicle had been taken several months earlier. It also pointed out that the District Court had already safeguarded Athira's interests by making future custody subject to the arbitrator's orders.

“If there is serious dispute regarding the propriety of engagement of the arbitrator, the same shall also be raised before the arbitral tribunal,” the court said. The appeal was dismissed, with liberty to the appellant to seek appropriate relief from the arbitrator.

For Appellant: Advocates C.R. Sanish, Karthik S. Acharya, Anjana K.P. And Arjun Sasi.

For Respondents: Advocates B.S. Suresh Kumar, Ashley John, Ranjana V., Anushree C.S. And Jaison Mathew.