Infra Arbitration Isn’t Just About Delays. It’s About Local Intelligence.

Infrastructure arbitrations in India often get boxed into a simplistic narrative: that they’re all about delay. But any disputes lawyer who’s handled a few of these will tell you: that’s just the surface. Beneath it is a tangled mess of regulatory bottlenecks, state-agency circulars, ambiguous EPC clauses, and localised operating risks.

Having advised on multiple infrastructure arbitrations involving government entities and EPC contractors across Maharashtra and Delhi NCR, I’ve noticed a pattern: timing is important, yes. But it’s rarely the full story. It’s about context. And that context is often very local.

1. A Delay Is Never Just a Delay

In one matter involving a mid-size EPC contractor and a metro rail authority, a “3-month delay” turned out to have five causes:

1. The utility shifting wasn’t completed by the municipal authority.

2. A nearby vendor protest led to work stoppage.

3. Change in project alignment led to fresh approvals.

4. Variation orders were given late but the liability was still pinned on the contractor.

5. Rainfall data from the previous year was wrongly used for planning.

By the time the matter was framed for arbitration, the narrative had completely shifted. The contractor wasn’t a defaulter. They were stuck in a maze of miscommunication and third-party variables.

2. Arbitrator Familiarity with Project Type Matters

In infra disputes, choosing the right arbitrator isn’t just about neutrality. It’s about domain literacy.

A matter involving a state roads authority turned into a prolonged procedural mess because the arbitrator wasn’t familiar with hybrid annuity models (HAM). Every clause had to be explained from scratch, slowing down the process and diluting impact.

Lesson? Arbitrator shortlists should always be filtered for domain familiarity. Not just names on a panel.

3. What Clients Miss While Drafting

In at least two EPC contracts I’ve reviewed post-dispute, I’ve seen arbitration clauses that:

• Miss the seat of arbitration.

• Refer to a non-existent institutional rule.

• Have inconsistent timelines for invocation versus notice.

Most infra clients think these are template contracts, but they’re anything but. Every project-specific risk needs to show up in your arbitration roadmap, even before there’s a dispute.

4. Case Law Snapshot

• Hindustan Construction Company Ltd v Union of India (2020): Supreme Court emphasized the need for fast-track mechanisms in infra arbitration.

• Dyna Technologies Pvt Ltd v Crompton Greaves Ltd (2019): Set aside award due to lack of reasons: a common risk when arbitrators don’t grasp the infra landscape.

• ONGC Ltd v Afcons Gunanusa JV (2022): Delays in arbitral appointment due to poorly worded clause- underlining again, the power of draftsmanship.

5. Strategy Tip: Build Context Into Your Claims

Arbitration is a story told in documents. In infra matters, your S-curves, site logs, regulatory correspondence, and even weather data are all characters in that story.

Start building that file before the dispute begins.

Infra arbitrations are about more than just timelines and terminations. They are about on-ground reality versus contractual imagination. If you’re advising on, or entering into, an infra project today — think not just about what could go wrong, but where, why, and how often.

That’s where your arbitration strength lies.