Part IA: The Arbitration Council of India, In Force but Not in Existence

In one line

Parliament created a national body to grade arbitral institutions and accredit arbitrators, the law creating it has been in force since October 2023, and the body itself has never been set up.

In exam wording: Part IA of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, sections 43A to 43M, was inserted by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act 2019 and provides for the establishment and incorporation of the Arbitration Council of India, its composition, duties and functions.

Why Parliament wanted a Council

Indian arbitration has been overwhelmingly ad hoc, which chapter 210 explains: run by the parties and the tribunal themselves rather than administered by an institution with rules, a panel and a fee scale.

Ad hoc arbitration has costs that are easy to see once listed. Every appointment goes to court under section 11 because there is no institution to make it. Fees are negotiated case by case. There is no quality control over who calls himself an arbitrator. And India loses work to Singapore and London, where institutional arbitration is the norm.

The 2019 amendment's answer was a national body to grade institutions, accredit arbitrators, and take over appointments from the courts. Part IA is that body.

The commencement, which is the fact most notes get wrong

Part IA is in force. The footnote to the Part in the consolidated text reads:

Ins. by Act 33 of 2019, s. 10 (w.e.f. 12-10-2023).

So sections 43A to 43M have been law since 12 October 2023, four years after the amending Act was passed. It is not a dead letter, an unnotified provision, or a proposal.

And the Council does not exist. On 6 February 2026, answering Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1223, the Minister of State for Law and Justice told Parliament, of the seven-member body Part IA provides for:

The Arbitration Council of India has not been constituted as yet.

Say both, in that order. A student who says only the first is wrong about the facts, and one who says only the second is wrong about the law. The correct statement is that the enabling law is in force and the institution has not been established.

What Part IA provides

Section 43A: definitions. Defines "Chairperson", "Council", "Member", "arbitral institution" and "prescribed" for the Part.

Section 43B: establishment and incorporation. The Central Government shall, by notification, establish for the purposes of the Act a Council to be known as the Arbitration Council of India. It shall be a body corporate with perpetual succession and a common seal, able to acquire, hold and dispose of property, contract, and sue and be sued. Its head office shall be at Delhi, and it may, with the prior approval of the Central Government, establish offices elsewhere in India.