Back
HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
Moushumi Bhattacharya, B.R.Madhusudhan Rao
Corvine Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Srinivasulu Kanday – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.
The present Commercial Court Appeal arises out of a docket order dated 11.12.2024 passed by the learned Commercial Court at Hyderabad on an application filed by the appellants under section 9 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the 1996 Act) i.e., I.A.No.260 of 2024 in COP.No.100 of 2024. The appellant filed the COP.No.100 of 2024 for restraining the respondent Nos.1 – 7 from causing any changes to the rights of the petitioners in two projects of the respondent No.7 LLP : “SreeSumeru” and “SreeTatva”.
2. The appellants filed the I.A for interim protection in line with the orders passed by this Court on 11.09.2024 as modified by orders dated 27.09.2024 and 01.10.2024. In the alternative, the petitioners sought continuation of the order dated 11.09.2024 till constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal or orders passed by the Arbitral Tribunal.
Submissions made on behalf of the Parties:
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants relies on the Supreme Court decision in Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Limited Vs. Essar Bulk Terminal Limited , [ (2022) 1 SCC 712 ] to submit that the interim protection granted by this Court in Civil Revi
Once an Arbitral Tribunal is constituted, Section 9 of the Arbitration Act prohibits further applications for interim relief unless the party shows that the remedy under Section 17 is ineffective.
Sub-section (3) of Section 9 provides for restriction of exercise of powers by the Court and it has to decide whether the remedy provided under section 17 is efficacious or not.
Interim injunction – Jurisdiction under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is not an adjudicatory substitute for final determination of rights, but a supportive mechanism to facilit....
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 may exercise jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act if the remedy under Section 17 is found to be inefficacious.
The court clarified that once an application for interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act is entertained, it can proceed despite the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal, unless the reme....
Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 permits interim relief after an arbitral award but before enforcement, irrespective of concurrent execution proceedings.
Point of law: When a suit or proceeding is not thrown out in limine but the Court receives it for consideration and disposal according to law, it must be regarded as entertaining the suit or proceedi....
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
