DEPT.

OF LEGAL SCIENCE

PROJECT
ON
“EXAMINE THE RELEVANCE AND SCOPE OF INTERIM
RELIEF PROVIDED BY COURTS BEFORE, DURING AND
AFTER ARBITRAL PROCEEDINGS.”

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR

THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF LAWS

SUBMITTED BY
NAME: SNEHA DUTTA
ID NO.: 221002010030
PAPER NAME & CODE: CLINICAL LEGAL EDUCATION I
PROGRAM & SEMESTER: 3 YEARS LL.B & 5th SEM

SUBMITTED TO
Ms. PUSHPITA PRAMANIK
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract……..………………………………………………………………….…………………………2
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………2
2. Research questions………………………………………………………………………….3
3. Research methodology……………………………………………………………………...3
4. Scope of relief granted by the court………………………………………………………...3
5. The relevance of interim measures given by the court……………………………………..5
6. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….…6
7. Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………..7

0
 TABLE OF CASES

Bharat Aluminium Co v Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc………………….…….……3

DLF Industries Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank ……………………………………..………...…3
Anand Gupta & Anr. Vs M/S. Almond Infrabuild Private Limited & Anr. ……………...........5
DLF Ltd v Leighton India Contractors(P) Ltd…………………………………………………….5
Deepak Mitra v Distt Judge, Allahabad……………………………………………………………5
EIH Ltd. v State of H.P……………………………………………………………………………….6
National Thermal Power Corporation v. Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd………………………....6

1
ABSTRACT
In India, arbitration has emerged as the preferred method of settling commercial disputes
because of its pragmatic approach and emphasis on party autonomy, setting it apart from other
forms of alternative dispute resolution. Furthermore, just like a judicial pronouncement, the
outcome of this process is binding on the parties even if it is simpler and more flexible than
traditional complex court proceedings. Even though the procedure is efficient, the process is
sometimes slowed down by parties using deliberate delay tactics. This can harm the interests
of the aggrieved party and, in certain situations, lessen the effectiveness of the final award.
Courts and arbitral tribunals intervene to address such problems and safeguard the parties'
interests by granting interim measures. These measures can be requested before the arbitration
starts, during the arbitration, or even after the award is made but before it is put into effect.
Interim relief plays an essential role in maintaining fairness by preserving the status quo,
safeguarding assets, and ensuring the final decision remains meaningful.

INTRODUCTION
In arbitration, interim relief is essential for safeguarding parties' rights and interests during the
entire process. This is governed in India by Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996. Section 9 of this Act has been made in conformity with Article 9 of UNCITRAL Model
Law. Section 9 is particularly noteworthy for its broad applicability, enabling parties to seek
interim measures from the court not only before the start of arbitration proceedings but also
during their pendency and even after an arbitral award has been rendered, but before it is
enforced in accordance with Section 36.

Significant improvements were made to Section 9 by the 2015 amendments, which

strengthened the framework to ensure efficiency and prevent misuse. Two new sub-sections,
namely, sub-sections (2) and (3) have been added. According to subsection (2), arbitration must
start within 90 days or within such further time as the court permits if an interim relief was
granted prior to the commencement of the arbitration. The other subsection emphasizes the
tribunal's authority in granting interim measures post-constitution, limiting court intervention
unless absolutely necessary. These modifications strengthen arbitration as the favoured method
of settling commercial disputes by reflecting the desired balance between judicial support and
arbitral autonomy1.

1
Sondhi, A. (2007). Arbitration in India — Some Myths Dispelled. Student Bar Review, 19(2), 48–54.

2
Research Questions
 What importance does Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 have on
interim relief at various arbitration stages, both procedurally and substantively?
 After the 2015 amendments, how has the judiciary managed to strike a balance between
arbitral autonomy under Section 17 and court intervention under Section 9?

Research Methodology
 A doctrinal analysis of statutory provisions, court rulings, and case law pertaining to
interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is part of
the research approach for this article.

SCOPE OF RELIEF GRANTED BY THE COURT

Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 defines "court" as either a district
court acting as the principal civil court of original jurisdiction or a high court with original civil
jurisdiction, provided it has the authority to adjudicate the subject matter of the arbitration as
if it were a civil suit. In Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc.
(BALCO) 2 , the Supreme Court made it clear that Parts I and II of the Act function
independently. The intention of Parliament is that the Act is territorial in nature and Sections 9
and 34 will apply only when the seat of arbitration is in India. The court having jurisdiction
over the arbitration agreement can grant interim relief under Section 9.

Furthermore, if a contract designates the exclusive jurisdiction of courts at a specific location,

only those courts should be asked for interim measures3. When the Court exercises its authority
under Section 9, it must keep in mind that Section 17 grants the Arbitral Tribunal similar
authority as well.

Courts may provide a variety of interim reliefs under Section 9 of the Act, such as:
 Appointment of guardian for a minor or person of unsound mind in arbitration
proceedings.
 Preservation, interim custody, or sale of goods (if the goods are of perishable nature)
for any goods related to the arbitration agreement.

2
Bharat Aluminium Co v Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc (BALCO)
3
DLF Industries Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank: AIR 1999 Del 11

3
  Securing the amount in dispute in the arbitration.
 Granting interim injunctions or appointment of a receiver.
 The detention, preservation or inspection of any property or thing, authorizing any
person to enter upon any land or building, authorizing any samples to be taken or
observations to be made or experiments to be tried in order to expedite the process and
obtain accurate and full information or evidence.

Despite the fact that the Act does not specify precise guidelines for providing temporary relief,
courts frequently use the Specific Relief Act and the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), especially
Orders XXXVIII and XXXIX.
Generally, interim relief is granted when:
 Prima facie there is a case;
 The balance of convenience lies with the aggrieved party who is seeking the relief;
 Irreparable injury may be caused if the interim relief is not granted;

For example, under Order XXXVIII of the CPC, if a court is convinced that the respondent
plans to sell or remove property from its jurisdiction, it may order security or property
attachment. There is no doubt about the fact that Court’s power u/s 9 is unfettered but the
discretion is based on established guiding principles as abovementioned.

The 2015 amendment introduces the subsection 3 of section 9. A bare reading of this subsection
indicates there is a restriction to entertain any plea for obtaining interim measures while the
tribunal is in continuation; with this, there is also an enabling provision for the court to take
cognizance of the application by adverse party in circumstances where tribunal’s relief is found
to be inefficacious. The actual goal of the legislation underlying this amendment was to reduce
the burden and reliance on the court while also encouraging the parties to seek any interim
relief from the tribunal first in order to prevent multiple proceedings. The Supreme Court
reiterated in Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail Limited & Ors that
Section 9(3) aims to clear court dockets and promote prompt and efficient relief from the
tribunal. This provision does not completely supersede court jurisdiction or prevent courts
from acting in appropriate cases. An order arising out of Section 9 from a court, not being an
award nor a decree, is enforceable as a decree in accordance with Section 36 of CPC which
states that the provisions governing the execution of decrees will also apply to the execution of

4
orders 4 . Hence, an order passed by a court, which is not formal decree but still requires
enforcement, can be enforced in the same manner as a decree.

THE RELEVANCE OF INTERIM MEASURES GIVEN BY THE COURT

The protection of parties' rights during arbitration proceedings is ensured in large part by the
interim orders that courts issue under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
These measures include attachment before judgment, maintaining the status quo between
parties, granting interim injunctions, appointment of receivers, security for costs and any other
measure which the court may consider just and convenient. The court secured plenty of power
in connection with passing an order as it enjoys the purpose of any proceedings before it.
Section 9 is significant because it guarantees the protection of the parties' rights until the
arbitration process is completed or the arbitral tribunal is established.

The Supreme Court made it clear that courts can consider applications under Section 9 even
after the arbitral tribunal has been established in the landmark case of ArcelorMittal Nippon
Steel India Ltd. v. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd. When unanticipated events render the tribunal
temporarily unavailable, such as when it is unable to meet quickly to consider urgent
applications for interim relief under Section 17, this power is very helpful. The Court further
underlined that Section 9 may be used in situations when there are legitimate doubts regarding
the independence or impartiality of an arbitrator, such as in cases of bias, leading to a delay or
failure in providing timely relief. In such situations, the court retains jurisdiction to intervene
and provide the necessary interim relief. Section 9 of the Act, in general, does not order any
specific performance of the contract itself rather, it preserves the subject matter of dispute until
the Tribunal is established 5. The court's interim measures are meant to safeguard the parties'
interests, especially in situations where such protection cannot be provided by the arbitral
tribunal.

The power contemplated under Section 9 is not intended to frustrate the arbitration proceeding.
This power can’t be exercised by the court if it would prejudice the powers vested in the
arbitrator and render him incapable of resolving the dispute 6. The importance of having both
Sections 9 and 17 has been emphasized by the Supreme Court. The court stated that the arbitral

4
Anand Gupta & Anr. Vs M/S. Almond Infrabuild Private Limited & Anr. (2024)
5
DLF Ltd v Leighton India Contractors(P) Ltd.
6
Deepak Mitra v Distt Judge, Allahabad.

5
tribunal is empowered by Section 17 to make orders by way of interim measures. The necessity
for section 9, in spite of the enactment of section 17, was that section 17 would operate only
during the existence of an arbitral tribunal and its being functional. The Delhi High Court in
the case of National Thermal Power Corporation v. Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd., 2004 SCC
OnLine Del 1309, held that powers of Courts and Arbitral Tribunal under sections 9 and 17 of
the Arbitration Act are coextensive in respect of the dispute.
The power granted to the arbitral tribunal under section 17 and the power granted to the court
under section 9 may, to some extent, overlap during the tribunal's existence; but when the
tribunal is not in session, the court remains the only recourse for interim relief. In order to
obtain interim relief, applicants must prove a prima facie case, balance of convenience,
likelihood of irreparable loss or injury incapable of being compensated in terms of money. The
court is unlikely to grant interim relief if these requirements are not satisfied 7.

CONCLUSION
During an ongoing arbitration process, interim measures serve as emergency solutions that help
to safeguard rights and interests of the parties. When an urgent matter needs to be addressed,
Indian law permits both courts and arbitration tribunals to intervene promptly. These measures
can prevent potential damage, hold assets, or maintain the status quo until a final decision is
made. By striking a balance between procedural flexibility and substantive fairness, judicial
interpretations have gradually broadened the scope of interim measures. Courts use their
discretionary powers wisely, understanding the fine line that separates arbitral autonomy from
judicial involvement.
For example, there may be a chance of significant financial loss or asset damage in situations
involving commercial disputes. In these situations, courts can intervene quickly to prevent
additional injury and guarantee that the parties' rights are protected while awaiting the
arbitration’s final decision. This proactive approach guarantees that no important assets or
rights are compromised during the arbitration process and aids in preserving the integrity of
the dispute. In essence, the evolution of legal provisions and judicial interpretations emphasizes
the importance of a flexible yet principled approach towards granting interim reliefs in
arbitration proceedings. As India continues to strengthen its arbitration framework, ensuring
consistency and clarity in the application of these provisions will be crucial for promoting
arbitration as an efficient and effective dispute resolution mechanism.

7
EIH Ltd. v State of H.P

6
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ARTICLES:
 Arbitration in India — Some Myths Dispelled. Student Bar Review, 19(2), 48–54.
 York, S. (2009). India as an Arbitration Destination: The Road Ahead. National Law
School of India Review, 21(2), 77–103.
 Banerji, G. (2009). Judicial Intervention in Arbitral Awards: A Practitioner’s Thoughts.
National Law School of India Review, 21(2), 39–53.

BOOKS:
 Eastern Book Company. (n.d.). Arbitration and conciliation and alternative dispute
resolution systems (pp. 110–138). Eastern Book Company.

CASES:
 Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc., (2012) 9 SCC
552.
 DLF Industries Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank: AIR 1999 Del 11.
 Anand Gupta & Anr. Vs M/S. Almond Infrabuild Private Limited & Anr. (2024)
 DLF Ltd v Leighton India Contractors(P) Ltd, 2020 SCC online Del 727
 Deepak Mitra v Distt Judge, Allahabad, AIR 2000 All 9, atp 2
 EIH Ltd. v State of H.P, AIR 2011 NOC 6 (HP).
 National Thermal Power Corporation v. Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd.

DATABASES:
 www.manupatra.com
 https://www.jstor.org

STATUTES:
 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.