Arbitrator Can Pronounce Award Once Matter Is Reserved Despite Counsel's Withdrawal: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that a sole arbitrator can proceed to pronounce an arbitral award even if the respondents' counsel does not produce documents he had undertaken to file and later withdraws his vakalat, provided the matter has already been reserved for passing of the award.

The court held that no further orders were required in the application and closed it.

Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed, "This Court is of the view that, when the matter had been reserved for passing of the award and an undertaking had been given by the learned counsel for the respondents to produce certain documents, which had not been produced, there is no necessity to seek the consent of the respondent to pass the award and the learned Arbitrator can proceed to pass the award in accordance with law.”

"The withdrawal of the vakalat by the learned counsel for the respondent, that too after the matter had been reserved for orders, would not in any manner prejudice the respondent and the learned Arbitrator can also pass the award based upon the records placed before him.”, the court added.

The application sought a direction to two partners of a partnership firm to deposit rental arrears collected from the firm's assets from 1993 onwards. It also sought continued deposit of the applicants' 26% share of the monthly rental income until disposal of the application.

During the hearing, the court took note of a letter dated July 1, 2026, from the sole arbitrator. The letter recorded that arguments had been heard and the matter had been reserved for the passing of the award.

It also stated that the respondents' counsel had undertaken to produce certain documents after the hearing. Those documents, however, were never produced.

The letter further recorded that, in response to the arbitrator's communication, the respondents' counsel informed him that he had returned the papers and documents to the respondents on November 18, 2024. According to the letter, this fact had not earlier been brought to the arbitrator's notice.

The arbitrator also informed the court that the award was ready. He stated that it would be passed if the respondents were aggrieved by either the award itself or by the High Court permitting its pronouncement.

The court held that the respondents' consent was not required once the matter had been reserved for passing of the award.

The court also noted that the relief sought in the application was itself the subject matter of the arbitration proceedings.

Since the arbitrator could proceed to pass the award immediately, it held that no further orders were required. The application was accordingly closed.

For Petitioners: Advocate R Subramanian

For Respondents: Advocate P.J Sri Ganesh