Arbitration is often chosen for its speed and flexibility. But disputes do not pause just because parties have agreed to arbitrate. Assets may be at risk, contracts may be breached mid-way, and urgent protection may be needed even before the final award is passed. This is where interim reliefs step in.
Under Indian law, interim reliefs act as a safety net. They protect parties from immediate harm and preserve the subject matter of the dispute. Both courts and arbitral tribunals have the power to grant such reliefs. Understanding how these powers work, and when to approach whom, can make a real difference to the outcome of a dispute.
What Are Interim Reliefs in Arbitration?
Interim reliefs are temporary measures granted during the pendency of arbitration proceedings. Their purpose is not to decide the dispute but to prevent irreparable harm while the arbitration is ongoing.
Common forms of interim relief include:
- Injunctions to restrain a party from acting in a certain manner
- Orders securing the amount in dispute
- Preservation of assets or evidence
- Appointment of receivers or custodians
These reliefs ensure that the final arbitral award does not become meaningless due to changes in circumstances.
Statutory Framework Under Indian Law
The law governing interim reliefs in arbitration is primarily found in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Two provisions are central:
- Section 9, which empowers courts to grant interim measures
- Section 17, which empowers arbitral tribunals to grant interim measures
While both aim to serve the same purpose, their scope, timing, and enforcement differ in important ways.
Powers of Courts Under Section 9
Section 9 allows parties to approach courts for interim relief at three stages:
- Before the commencement of arbitration
- During the arbitration proceedings
- After the arbitral award is made but before it is enforced
This wide time window makes Section 9 a powerful tool, especially in urgent situations.
Nature of Court-Granted Reliefs
Courts can grant a range of reliefs under Section 9, including injunctions, security for claims, and asset preservation. The principles applied are similar to those in civil proceedings.
Courts typically examine:
- Whether there is a prima facie case
- Whether irreparable harm would be caused without relief
- Whether the balance of convenience favours the applicant
In Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. NEPC India Ltd. (1999), the Supreme Court confirmed that courts can grant interim relief even before arbitration formally begins, provided the party shows a genuine intent to commence arbitration.
Limits on Court Intervention
Indian arbitration law follows a clear policy of minimal court interference. This principle is reflected in Section 5 of the Act.
As a result, once an arbitral tribunal is constituted, courts are expected to step back. The 2015 amendments reinforced this approach by stating that courts should not entertain Section 9 applications after the tribunal is formed unless the remedy under Section 17 is ineffective.
In ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. v. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd. (2021), the Supreme Court stressed that Section 9 should not be used to bypass the tribunal without valid reasons.
Powers of Arbitral Tribunals Under Section 17
Section 17 empowers arbitral tribunals to grant interim measures once they are constituted. This provision was significantly strengthened by the 2015 amendments.
Before the amendment, tribunal orders lacked enforceability. Today, interim orders passed under Section 17 are deemed enforceable as if they were orders of a court.
Scope of Tribunal Powers
An arbitral tribunal can grant interim reliefs similar to those available under Section 9. These include:
- Injunctions
- Security for claims
- Protection or preservation of assets
- Interim custody or sale of goods
Tribunals also have the flexibility to tailor reliefs based on the nature of the dispute and the arbitration agreement.In Alka Chandewar v. Shamshul Ishrar Khan (2017), the Supreme Court clarified that disobedience of Section 17 orders could attract contempt proceedings, reinforcing their authority.
Key Differences Between Section 9 and Section 17
While both provisions deal with interim reliefs, they serve different practical roles.
Timing
Section 9 can be invoked before arbitration begins. Section 17 can be used only after the tribunal is in place.
Decision Maker
Section 9 involves judicial intervention. Section 17 keeps the process within the arbitral framework.
Enforcement
Orders under Section 17 are directly enforceable post-2015. Earlier, parties had to approach courts again, which caused delays.
Strategic Use
Section 9 is preferred in urgent cases or when tribunal constitution may take time. Section 17 is suitable once arbitration is fully underway.
Choosing the Right Forum for Interim Relief
The decision to approach a court or an arbitral tribunal should be strategic, not automatic.
Courts may be the better option when:
- Immediate relief is needed before tribunal formation
- The opposing party is likely to ignore tribunal orders
- Third-party rights are involved
Tribunals are usually preferable when:
- Arbitration has already commenced
- Speed and confidentiality are priorities
- Parties want to avoid parallel court proceedings
Indian courts have repeatedly encouraged parties to rely on Section 17 once the tribunal is operational.
Judicial Approach to Interim Reliefs in Arbitration
Indian courts have gradually adopted a pro-arbitration stance. They recognise that excessive judicial intervention defeats the purpose of arbitration.
At the same time, courts remain cautious. Interim reliefs are not granted lightly. Applicants must show urgency, necessity, and fairness.
In Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail Ltd. (2021), the Supreme Court upheld the enforceability of emergency arbitrator orders, signalling India’s growing alignment with international arbitration practices.
Practical Challenges and Takeaways
Despite legal clarity, practical challenges remain. Delays in tribunal constitution, enforcement hurdles, and tactical misuse of Section 9 still occur.
For businesses and individuals, a few lessons stand out:
- Interim reliefs are protective, not punitive
- Early legal advice can prevent irreversible damage
- Arbitration clauses should be carefully drafted to address interim measures
A well-timed interim application can preserve rights long before the final award is delivered.
Conclusion
Interim reliefs play a crucial role in making arbitration effective. They ensure that disputes remain manageable while the arbitration process runs its course.
Indian law provides a balanced framework, allowing courts to step in when necessary and empowering arbitral tribunals to act independently. The key lies in choosing the right forum at the right time.
When used responsibly, interim reliefs protect interests without undermining the spirit of arbitration.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The content may not reflect the most current legal developments and is not guaranteed to be accurate, complete, or up-to-date. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional before taking any action based on the information provided. The authors and publishers disclaim any liability for any loss or damage incurred as a result of reliance on this article. This article does not create an attorney-client relationship.