#Section 17

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 Calcutta High Court held that arbitral tribunals may grant Section 17 interim measures without first deciding Section 16 jurisdictional objections, treating such orders as neutral fact finding steps to preserve the status quo and enable relief in arbitration.

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 Delhi High Court ruled that a claim of residence under Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act does not stay a civil suit for possession, as the Act offers only protective relief, not a bar to eviction. Property owners can therefore proceed with eviction even when the occupant invokes a residence right under the DVA. This clarifies the limited scope of Section 17 in property disputes.

Allahabad High Court clarifies that the 45-day limitation period under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act begins from the issuance of the sale certificate, not the auction date. This ruling sets aside orders by the Debts Recovery Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, remanding the case for fresh consideration on merits, impacting borrowers and secured creditors in debt recovery proceedings.

Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that invoking the urgency clause under Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act without demonstrable proof of real urgency violates natural justice and Section 5A. The court invalidated the acquisition proceedings due to dual awards and non-payment of compensation, reinforcing that procedural fairness must precede planned development.

Sikkim High Court reaffirms that an arbitration clause remains enforceable despite contractual invalidity, upholding the separability principle. The court invalidated a contractual restriction on the tribunal's interim powers under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and appointed a former Supreme Court judge as sole arbitrator, reinforcing the autonomy of arbitration agreements.

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.

Bombay High Court rules that a strong prima facie case under a liquidated damages clause overrides a respondent's financial recovery claims, mandating interim security via bank guarantee. The ruling reinforces that arbitral tribunals retain discretion to order interim measures under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act where contractual breaches are evident, even if the respondent disputes liability.

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 Section 9 petitions may be converted to Section 17 applications once arbitral tribunal is constituted, clarifying procedural boundaries for interim relief in arbitration.