Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH
Indian Oil Petronas Private Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Ennore Tank Terminals Private Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of arbitration agreements and disputes. (Para 1 , 2 , 5 , 6 , 6 , 7 , 11) |
| 2. consideration of the balance of convenience and irreparable loss. (Para 8 , 14 , 36) |
| 3. final orders and directions regarding interim relief. (Para 12 , 38) |
| 4. court's analysis and reasoning on injunctive reliefs. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
ORDER :
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
O.A.Nos.66 and 67 of 2025 have been filed by the applicant namely one M/s.Ennore Tank Terminals Private Limited under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity, the Act) seeking respectively (i) for an order of interim injunction restraining the respondent namely one M/s.Indianoil Petronas Private Limited from permitting any third party connections to the respondent’s LPG pipelines and (ii) for an order of interim injunction restraining the respondent from accepting supplies of propane, butane and/or LPG through any means apart from the applicant’s facilities except by road receipts.
2. The said original applications were disposed of by a common order dated 25.2.2025. Later, the respondent filed the present applications namely Arbitration Application Nos.1352 and 1353 of 2025 seeking to va
The court affirmed that exclusive agreements mandate adherence, allowing for interim relief to prevent irreparable harm during arbitration proceedings.
The words 'Arbitral Tribunal' in Section 9(3) of Act have to take colour from all said provisions and thus have to be interpreted as Arbitral Tribunal constituted to adjudicate disputes which have ar....
The court ruled that the subsequent agreement supersedes the initial agreement, establishing jurisdiction at Bhavnagar, and the applicants failed to meet the criteria for an interim injunction.
The judgment reinforces the principle that courts have limited grounds to interfere with arbitral awards, respecting the finality of arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
The court may exercise jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act if the remedy under Section 17 is found to be inefficacious.
Principle of minimum judicial intervention is one of fundamental tenets of arbitration law.
The court may exercise jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act if the remedy under Section 17 is found to be inefficacious, particularly regarding third parties not party....
The court upheld that ongoing arbitration processes require interim protections for a contractor against adverse actions by the railway, emphasizing the importance of contractual compliance and exist....
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
