ARTICLE
11 August 2026

Can An Arbitrator Restore A Terminated Dealership? Bombay High Court On Arbitral Powers (Video)

IL
IndiaLaw LLP

Contributor

Founded by Managing Partner K.P. Sreejith, INDIALAW began as a small firm in Mumbai with a commitment to client service and corporate-focused legal solutions. From its modest beginnings, the firm has grown into a respected name by prioritizing excellence, integrity, and tailored legal strategies. INDIALAW’s team believes in adapting to each client’s unique needs, ensuring that solutions align with individual circumstances and business goals.

The firm combines its deep understanding of the local business landscape with experience across multiple jurisdictions, enabling clients to navigate complex legal environments effectively. INDIALAW emphasizes proactive service, anticipating client needs and potential challenges to provide timely, high-quality legal support. The firm values lasting client relationships and sees its role as a trusted advisor, dedicated to delivering business-friendly and principled legal counsel.

The judgment examines an important issue in commercial arbitration: whether an arbitral tribunal can restore a terminated dealership or franchise arrangement after holding the termination to be illegal.
India Accounting and Audit
IndiaLaw LLP are most popular:
  • within Law Department Performance, Real Estate and Construction and International Law topic(s)

In this episode of Podcast Bites by IndiaLaw LLP, host Ayush Shukla discusses the Bombay High Court’s judgment in Nayara Energy Limited v. M/s Mahendra Sales Services.

The judgment examines an important issue in commercial arbitration: whether an arbitral tribunal can restore a terminated dealership or franchise arrangement after holding the termination to be illegal.

The Bombay High Court clarified that arbitral tribunals must operate within the terms of the contract and applicable law. In private commercial contracts, requirements such as prior notice or hearing cannot be imported unless the contract itself provides for them. The Court also reiterated that determinable contracts, such as dealership, franchise, distribution or similar commercial arrangements, cannot ordinarily be specifically enforced, and the appropriate remedy for wrongful termination is usually damages.

This episode explains the facts of the dispute, the limits of arbitral powers, the relevance of the Specific Relief Act, the importance of proving damages through pleadings and evidence, and why courts may interfere with arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 where the award ignores the contract or suffers from patent illegality.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More