Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
Indo Spirits – Appellant
Versus
Pernod Ricard India Pvt Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
1. With the consent of the parties, all the aforesaid Appeals were taken up together for hearing. Since they arise out of the same Impugned Order and involve substantially similar grounds and issues, this Court proceeds to adjudicate them by way of the present consolidated judgment.
PROLOGUE:
2. These Appeals under Section 37 (2)(b) of theArbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, A&C Act have been preferred assailing theCommon Order dated 14.10.2025, Impugned Order passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator in DIAC Case Nos. 9176/08-24 and 9136/08-24, DIAC Cases titled as Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd. v. Indospirits & Ors. and Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd. v. Indospirit Distribution Ltd. & Ors., respectively.
3. By the Impugned Order, the learned Arbitrator disposed of the Applications filed under Section 17 of the A&C Act by Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd. (the Claimant in both proceedings), Applications against two sets of Respondents in the aforesaid DIAC cases. In both Applications, extensive interim measures were sought.
4. The learned Arbitrator, in the Impugned Order, has succinctly recorded and clarified the nature of the reliefs claimed in
The court emphasized that interim reliefs must demonstrate urgency and evidence of asset dissipation; unpleaded restraints violate natural justice, requiring adherence to procedural safeguards.
The court ruled that interim relief under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act cannot effectively adjudicate final rights or impose substantial financial burdens without trial, emphasizing the importanc....
The discretionary power under section 17 of the A&C Act should be exercised sparingly and not to convert indeterminate and unsecured counter-claims into secure claims.
The arbitral tribunal has broad powers to issue interim measures under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, ensuring protection of claims during ongoing proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for parties to be treated with equality and given a full opportunity to present their case in arbitral proceedings, as mandated by ....
An arbitral tribunal, while adjudicating an application for interim protection under Section 17, does not determine the lis between the parties.
Principle of minimum judicial intervention is one of fundamental tenets of arbitration law.
(1) There is nothing in Arbitration Act that prohibits contracting parties from agreeing to a provision providing for an award being made by an Emergency Arbitrator.(2) No appeal lies under Section 3....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
