https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96912 Challenge concerned termination and substitution of an arbitrator and whether hearings held during the IBC moratorium were void. The Court held that judicial intervention under the arbitration law is limited and that a substitute arbitrator should continue proceedings from the existing stage rather than require a de novo restart. Consequently, the High Court's declaration that seven hearing dates during the moratorium were a nullity was set aside. To protect reliance interests and avoid inequity, transactions affecting third-party rights (home buyers) were declared valid, preserving continuity of arbitral proceedings and upholding the self-contained arbitration regime. en-us Mon, 16 Feb 2026 09:46:29 +0530 Mon, 16 Feb 2026 09:46:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96912 Challenge concerned termination and substitution of an arbitrator and whether hearings held during the IBC moratorium were void. The Court held that judicial intervention under the arbitration law is limited and that a substitute arbitrator should continue proceedings from the existing stage rather than require a de novo restart. Consequently, the High Court's declaration that seven hearing dates during the moratorium were a nullity was set aside. To protect reliance interests and avoid inequity, transactions affecting third-party rights (home buyers) were declared valid, preserving continuity of arbitral proceedings and upholding the self-contained arbitration regime. Highlights Indian Laws Mon, 16 Feb 2026 09:46:29 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96912