JUDGMENT :

Harish Tandon, J.:

1. The appellant is consistently raising an issue at the different stages of the proceedings which was raised at the time of granting a leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent whether the Clause relating to governing law contained in the agreement shall ipso facto exclude the powers of the Court to pass interim reliefs under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act as it is required to be construed as ‘an agreement to contrary’ appearing in proviso to Section 2 (2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2. There is no dispute to the fact that the appellant has suffered an award dated 29th March, 2021 for an amount of USD 30,35,249.87 (equivalent to INR 22,08,75,133) passed by the ICC in a proceeding governed by the British Law having a seat/place of arbitration in London, UK. Such being an undisputed fact, a plea was taken when a leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent was sought by the respondent that Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act contained in Part I has its applicability to a domestic award and not the foreign awards which is governed by Part II thereof. The Single Bench while granting a leave of Clause 12 of