#Interim Measures

The Delhi High Court held that Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction survives the Section 37(3) bar on second appeals to review a Section 37(2)(b) appellate order, but dismissed the petition on merits. The court upheld the appellate court's modification of the arbitrator's Section 17 interim direction limiting document production to the pre-arbitration period, finding no perversity warranting interference.

The Delhi HC held that Section 9 interim measures continue until the arbitral tribunal is constituted, after which the matter shifts to Section 17 and the tribunal may modify or vacate them, clarifying shift of interim relief from courts to tribunals.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that while Section 9 permits interim preservation of assets through contractual lien, it cannot be used to effect a final disposal like public auction - such remedies require a full adjudication by the arbitral tribunal. This clarifies a critical boundary for businesses relying on lien clauses to recover dues, preventing premature asset liquidation before rights are formally decided.

Karnataka High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging an interim arbitration order under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act after a decade-long delay, ruling that inaction and failure to prosecute the matter render the challenge infructuous. The judgment underscores the necessity of timely legal remedies in arbitration disputes to avoid procedural forfeiture.

Bombay High Court invokes its equitable jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act to safeguard a mortgagee's security by ordering lease rentals from mortgaged property to be deposited in a no-lien account. The ruling reinforces that interim measures can override objections based on maintainability or membership disputes, ensuring preservation of assets during arbitration.

Bombay High Court affirms that an arbitral tribunal's interim order under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act mandates disclosure of partnership records, even when the partner's status is contested. The ruling reinforces that access to firm documents is a substantive right, not contingent on final determination of partnership disputes, ensuring transparency in ongoing arbitration.

Bombay High Court rules that once an arbitral tribunal is constituted, courts lose jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The judgment directs release of surplus funds to the developer and bars third-party interim relief claims, reinforcing the primacy of arbitral tribunals in contractual disputes.

The Bombay High Court has affirmed that arbitral tribunals may order interim security for crystallised debts - such as electricity dues or lock-in license deposits - only when explicitly provided in the contract. This reinforces that Section 17 is not a tool for final adjudication but a provisional safeguard, clarifying boundaries for parties in commercial arbitration and preventing tribunal overreach.

The Bombay High Court ruled that third-party buyers with registered sale agreements hold superior rights over a developer's lien under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The court directed possession of flats to be handed over to buyers upon deposit of the balance consideration, reinforcing that arbitration interim measures cannot override duly executed property transfers. This decision impacts developers, flat purchasers, and arbitration proceedings involving real estate disputes.

Bombay High Court holds that interim relief under Section 9 cannot override third-party operations already underway; damages suffice where monetary compensation is adequate.

Bombay High Court holds that contractual audit rights under service agreements survive termination and permit interim measures for forensic inspection in data breach cases.

Bombay High Court holds that dissenting cooperative society members cannot block redevelopment projects; interim relief under Section 9 Arbi tration Act granted to vacate premises pending substantive adjudication.