In the fast-paced world of commercial disputes, parties are increasingly turning to arbitration for faster, private, and efficient dispute resolution. But what happens when urgent intervention is needed before the final arbitral award is passed?
This is where interim measures come into play.
Whether you're a business seeking to safeguard your rights or a legal professional navigating arbitration, understanding the interim remedies under Sections 9 and 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is critical.
What Is Arbitration and Why Does It Matter?
Arbitration is a private dispute resolution process where parties agree to resolve their disputes outside the courtroom, through a neutral third party—an arbitrator.
Most commercial contracts today contain an arbitration clause, which allows for a more flexible, time-saving, and confidential resolution of disputes compared to traditional litigation.
India’s arbitration law, governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, draws inspiration from the UNCITRAL Model Law, ensuring global best practices in arbitral proceedings.
Why Are Interim Measures Important in Arbitration?
Even though an arbitral award is the final outcome of the arbitration process, certain situations demand urgent action to preserve evidence, secure assets, or prevent irreparable harm. This is where interim measures step in—orders issued before, during, or after arbitration to protect the rights of the parties.
Legal History: Evolution of Arbitration in India
- 1899: Arbitration first introduced under the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899, limited to three presidency towns.
- 1940: Arbitration Act, 1940 enacted to streamline dispute resolution—but was widely criticized for delays and excessive court interference (Guru Nanak Foundation v. Rattan Singh, 1981).
- 1996: A major overhaul with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, based on UNCITRAL Model Law, covering both domestic and international arbitration.
- 2015 Amendment: Empowered arbitral tribunals to grant interim relief (Section 17) and minimized judicial interference under Section 9.
Section 9: Interim Relief by Courts
Section 9 allows parties to approach the court for urgent relief:
- Before arbitration starts
- During arbitral proceedings
- After award is passed but before it’s enforced
However, after the 2015 Amendment, Section 9(3) mandates that courts should not entertain applications once the tribunal is formed, unless the relief under Section 17 is ineffective.
Important: If the court grants interim relief before arbitration begins, proceedings must commence within 90 days.
Case Insight: In Essar House Pvt Ltd v. Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel, the Supreme Court clarified that CPC principles must be followed, but courts retain broad discretion under Section 9.
Section 17: Interim Relief by Arbitral Tribunal
Section 17 gives the arbitral tribunal powers similar to a civil court for granting interim relief. These can include:
- Appointment of guardian for minor or person of unsound mind
- Safeguarding or inspection of property
- Interim custody or sale of goods
- Entry into property to inspect or take samples
- Freezing of assets or bank accounts
Thanks to the 2015 Amendment, any order under Section 17 is now binding and enforceable like a court order, ensuring effective protection during arbitration.
Case Law: In Deep Industries v. ONGC (2020), the Supreme Court held that although Article 227 of the Constitution can be invoked against tribunal orders, it should be done sparingly and only where jurisdiction is lacking.
Appeals Against Interim Orders
- Under Section 37(2)(b), an appeal lies against interim orders issued by the arbitral tribunal.
- However, no second appeal is permitted under the Act.
- Article 226/227 can be invoked for judicial review, but courts discourage excessive interference (Deep Industries case).
Interim Relief: Conditions for Grant
Whether under Section 9 or 17, the applicant must establish:
- Prima facie case – The claim is plausible on first look.
- Balance of convenience – The harm caused by denial outweighs inconvenience to the opposing party.
- Irreparable harm – Damage that cannot be compensated by money.
Key Case: Dorab Cawasji Warden v. Coomi Sorab Warden – The Supreme Court set the gold standard for granting interim relief, emphasizing these three conditions.
Timelines and Enforcement
The 2015 Amendment introduced Section 29A, mandating that the arbitral award must be delivered within 12 months of the tribunal's constitution, extendable by mutual consent or court order.
This change, along with enforceability of interim relief, ensures speed, certainty, and minimal interference—the pillars of modern arbitration law.
Conclusion: Why Interim Measures Are Crucial
Interim measures are not just legal tools—they are essential safeguards in arbitration. They protect the subject matter of disputes, prevent injustice, and ensure that the final award is meaningful.
Thanks to progressive amendments and judicial clarity, Sections 9 and 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 now provide a strong framework for urgent relief—balancing judicial oversight with arbitral autonomy.
As arbitration in India continues to evolve, interim measures remain the bedrock of timely and effective dispute resolution.
Keywords: arbitration interim relief India, Section 9 Arbitration Act, Section 17 arbitral tribunal powers, urgent orders in arbitration, interim measures in commercial disputes, arbitration act 1996 explained, enforceability of arbitration awards India, court powers arbitration
