JUDGMENT :

1. This petition has been preferred under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the Act”) for grant of following relief:

(i) Securing the amount int eh sum of INR 6,00,56,413.00 (Six Crores Fifty-Six Thousand Four Hundred and Thirteen only) due and payable to the Applicant Company from the Respondents on account of delivered energy/supply of electricity and consumption thereof, necessitated in the wake of breach persisted with by the Respondent in the matter of payment of the dues since the commission of the Hydropower Project on 27.09.2020;

(ii) With further Orders commanding the Respondents in particular Respondent no.3 to release in due discharge of the Contractual Obligations undertaken by the Respondents under the Power Purchase Agreement dated 21.05.2018, the amount in the sum of INR 6,00,56,413.00 (Six Crores Fifty-Six Thousand Four Hundred and Thirteen only) dues and long overdue and payable to the Applicant Company.

2. The case set up by applicant is that it was allotted Khari-1 Small Hydro Power Development Scheme located at Village Ahama Trigam, Tehsil Banihal-Khari District Ramban, J&K on BOOT (Build Own Operate Transfer) basis, by J&K Energy Development Agency (JAKEDA) vide allotment letter dated 16th September 2013. According to applicant, he availed financial assistance from Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited (IRDA) by way of Term Loan in the sum of Rs.27.25 Crores. It is claimed that aforesaid project was completed and commissioned by applicant company on 27th September 2020 and thereafter commenced supply of electricity to respondent no.2, followed by periodical invoices raised by applicant company for the electricity supplied to respondents and consumed by it/its end consumers. Petitioner claims that respondents have so far consumed electricity supplied worth the sum of Rs.6,00,56,413.00, which is yet to be paid.

3. Objection/counter has been filed by respondents, in which they insist that application does not fulfil the purpose of Section 9 of the Act as there is no immediate cause available to applicant for invoking Section 9. It is also contended that applicant is trying to raise highly disputed questions of facts which can only be adjudicated in case applicant commences arbitration proceedings and that a relief, which may be ultimate and final though not admitted, cannot be granted in the given circumstances.

4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and considered the matter.

5. As is discernible from the file, Clause 10.0 of the Agreement dated 21st May 2018 entered into between the parties, all questions, differences or disputes between the parties arising out of or in connection with this Agreement to the extent of power vested with JKSERC, shall be settled through arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Jammu & Kashmir Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997 and any statutory modifications thereto. It also provides that efforts should be made by parties to settle the dispute through reconciliation before referring the matter to arbitration.

6. In the above backdrop, it would be appropriate to reproduce Section 9 of the Act:

“9. Interim measures, etc., by Court. –

(1) A party may, before or during arbitral proceedings or at any time after the making of the arbitral award but before it is enforced in accordance with section 36, apply to a Court:

(i) for the appointment of a guardian for a minor or a person of unsound mind for the purposes of arbitral proceedings; or

(ii) for an interim measure of protection in respect of any of the following matters, namely:

(a) the preservation, interim custody or sale of any goods which are the subject-matter of the arbitration agreement;

(b) securing the amount in dispute in the arbitration;

(c) the detention, preservation or inspection of any property or thing which is the subject-matter of the dispute in arbitration, or as to which any question may arise therein and authorising for any of the afores