JUDGMENT (Oral)

(Video-Conferencing)

1. Ad interim orders already stand passed in favour of the petitioner.

2. Subsequently, applications have been filed in these petitions before this Court, inter alia, for modification of the ad interim order in OMP (I) (COMM) 130/2021.

3. An arbitrator already stands appointed in both these matters and the next date of hearing before the learned Arbitrator is stated to be 30th September, 2021.

4. In these circumstances, Section 9 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("1996 Act", in short) would ordinarily proscribe this Court from continuing with these proceedings, which ought to be relegated for decision by the learned Arbitrator as proceedings under Section 17 of the 1996 Act. The only exception is if "circumstances exist, which may not render the remedy provided under Section 17 efficacious".

5. The law in this regard stands authoritatively expounded in the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India v Essar Bulk Terminal, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 718. That was a case in which, after judgement was reserved on the applications of the petitioner under Section 9 by the District Court, the Arbitral Tr