Sections 11-12 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Section 11 lists three situations in which a mediation service provider may end a mediator's mandate. Section 12 then says who appoints the replacement and by when: the parties or the provider, in each case within seven days of the termination.
A provider may terminate a mediator's mandate on (i) a party's application under section 10(4)(i), (ii) information that the mediator is involved in a conflict of interest, or (iii) the mediator's withdrawal for any reason. Termination under (ii) needs a hearing for the mediator and a finding of justifiable doubt that has been brought to the parties' notice, with either party wanting a replacement. A replacement must be appointed within seven days of termination. The Act comes into force by notification, and the date is not in the text consulted.
Section 11: when a provider may terminate
Section 11 says "A mediation service provider may terminate the mandate of a mediator upon" three grounds. The word is "may": the provider has the power but the section does not oblige it to act on every report. The grounds are:
| Clause | Ground | Where it comes from |
|---|---|---|
| (i) | Receipt of an application from a party under clause (i) of section 10(4) | A party wants a replacement after a conflict disclosure in institutional mediation |
| (ii) | Receipt of information about the mediator being involved in a matter of conflict of interest from participants or any other person | A tip-off from someone other than the mediator |
| (iii) | The mediator's withdrawal from mediation for any reason | The mediator steps down |
Section 11 operates in institutional mediation, because it names the "mediation service provider". For other mediation, section 10(4)(ii) lets the party terminate the mandate directly; see our article on sections 9 and 10. If you want help drafting an appointment-and-replacement clause that works with sections 11 and 12, our mediation services team can look at it.
Clause (i): application by a party
Clause (i) links to section 10(4)(i), under which a party, after a conflict disclosure under section 10(1) or (2), applies to the provider for termination of the mandate. Section 11(i) gives the provider the power to terminate on receiving that application. The text does not set a time within which the provider must decide, and no rule or regulation on the point is in the text consulted.
Clause (ii) and its proviso: information from others
Clause (ii) covers a different source: information from "participants or any other person" that the mediator is involved in a matter of conflict of interest. Participants include advisers, advocates, consultants, technical experts and observers (section 3(r)). The proviso sets conditions before termination can take effect:
- the provider must give the mediator a hearing;
- the provider must find that there is justifiable doubt as to the independence or impartiality of the mediator;
- the same must have been brought to the notice of the parties; and
- either party must desire to replace the mediator.
The proviso says termination under clause (ii) "shall be effected if" these conditions are met. In short, a report from a third party does not by itself end the mandate. The mediator is heard, the doubt must be justifiable, the parties must know, and at least one party must want a change. The provider's procedure for the hearing is not in the text consulted.
Clause (iii): withdrawal
Clause (iii) lets the provider terminate on the mediator's "withdrawal from mediation for any reason". The Act does not require the mediator to give reasons, nor does it say how notice of withdrawal is to be given. The clause also does not say whether the mediator needs the parties' or the provider's permission to withdraw. If you rely on a named mediator, consider a clause in your mediation agreement requiring notice of withdrawal.
Section 12: who appoints the replacement and when
Section 12 says "Upon termination of the mandate of mediator" two rules apply:
| Clause | Case | Who appoints | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| (i) | Mediation other than institutional mediation, under clause (ii) of section 10(4) | The parties may appoint another mediator | Within seven days from such termination |
| (ii) | Termination under section 11 | The mediation service provider appoints another mediator from the panel maintained by it | Within seven days from such termination |
In clause (i) the word is "may": the parties may appoint another mediator. If the parties cannot agree, the text of section 12 does not say what happens next, and the Act is silent on a default route for non-institutional mediation. Parties who want certainty can name a provider or an appointing process in their mediation agreement; see our article on section 8 for how the appointment route works from the start.
In clause (ii) the word is "shall": the provider must appoint another mediator from its own panel, and the text does not add a consent step or mention the parties' preference. Section 9, which asks the provider to consider suitability and the parties' preference when appointing from its panel, is not repeated in section 12.
Effect on time limits
The sections on replacement do not say that a change of mediator restarts the clock. Section 18(1) counts one hundred and twenty days from the date fixed for the first appearance before the mediator, and section 18(2) allows a further period agreed by the parties not exceeding sixty days; see our article on section 18. The text of sections 11 and 12 says nothing about extending that period because of a replacement. Parties who expect a change of mediator should plan their calendar accordingly.
Practical checklist
- On a conflict disclosure, decide quickly whether to waive in writing or to ask for a replacement.
- In institutional mediation, apply in writing to the provider and keep proof of the date.
- In non-institutional mediation, give written notice terminating the mandate and propose a replacement.
- Diarise seven days from termination.
- Watch the section 18 time limit.
Need help with a change of mediator?
A conflict report or a withdrawal in the middle of mediation can stall the process while the clock keeps running. We can advise on the application, the replacement and the effect on your timeline through our mediation services.
Key takeaways
- A provider may terminate a mandate on three grounds: a party's application, information of conflict, or withdrawal (section 11).
- Termination on information of conflict needs a hearing for the mediator and a finding of justifiable doubt that the parties know of, with a party wanting replacement.
- A replacement must be appointed within seven days of termination (section 12).
- In non-institutional mediation the parties appoint; in institutional mediation the provider appoints from its panel.
- The Act is silent on a default route if non-institutional parties cannot agree on a replacement.
Read next
- Sections 9-10 of the Mediation Act, 2023: preference of parties, conflict of interest and disclosure
- Section 8 of the Mediation Act, 2023: appointment of mediators
- Section 18 of the Mediation Act, 2023: time limit for completion of mediation
- Mediation Act 2023 for commercial and trade disputes
Disclaimer: Based on the Mediation Act, 2023 as enacted and published in the Gazette of India on 15 September 2023, as consulted on 2 October 2026. The Act comes into force by notification; the commencement of each provision, the rules and the regulations should be checked. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.