* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 13.04.2026 + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 71/2026 & I.A. 8888/2026 ASIA SHIPPING INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Samudra Sarangi, Ms.

Saloni Jain, Ms. Panchi Agarwal and Ms. Navya Nanda, Advocates.

versus MR ABDUL SALAM KHAN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Brijesh Kumar Sharma and Ms. Payal Gupta, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL)

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

1. The present Petition has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, $~26, seeking the following reliefs:-

“(a) Direct the Respondent to deposit the Outstanding Liability of INR 2,82,20,063 (Indian Rupees Two Crore eighty two lakh twenty thousand and sixty three) which includes the principal amount of INR 2,13,18,344 (Indian Rupees Two Crore thirteen lakh eighteen thousand three hundred and forty four) along with the interest of INR 69,01,719 (Indian Rupees Sixteen Nine lakh one thousand seven hundred and nineteen) calculated at the rate of 24% p.a. till 2 February 2026, in an interest bearing deposit before this Hon'ble Court till the conclusion of arbitration proceedings between the parties;

(b) In the alternate to prayer (a), direct the Respondent to furnish an unconditional bank guarantee for the sum of INR 2,82,20,063 (Indian Rupees Two Crore eighty two lakh

1 Act

twenty thousand and sixty three) in favour of the Petitioner, which can be encashed upon appropriate directions from this Hon'ble Court;

(c) Restrain the Respondent, his agents, servants, or anyone acting on his behalf from selling, transferring, alienating, disposing of, creating third-party rights, or encumbering any of his movable or immovable assets, bank accounts, and receivables, including but not limited to the business assets of Heritage Farms, till the final disposal of the arbitration proceedings;

( d) Direct the Respondent to file a detailed affidavit disclosing all his assets his movable and immovable assets, including but not limited to his bank accounts, investments, and receivables;

(e) Pass ex-parte ad-interim orders in reference to prayers (a) to (d) mentioned above;

(f) Award costs of this petition to the Petitioner; and (g) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Though the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent submits that a Reply to the present Petition came to be filed on 11.04.2026, the same does not form a part of the record.

3. A physical copy of the same, which was served in advance to the Petitioner, has been handed over across the bar by the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

4. The same is confirmed to be the copy of the Reply as filed by the Respondent, and the Registry is directed to ensure that the same is taken on record.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent objects to the reliefs as sought for on the ground that the present proceedings are in the nature of recovery proceedings and the same are not permissible under Section 9 of the Act.

6. He further contends that there is no collateral security mortgaged with the Petitioner, and therefore, the reliefs in respect of the movable and immovable assets cannot be granted.

7. Per Contra, learned counsel for Petitioner submits that the proceedings under Section 9 of the Act are intended to ensure that the subject matter of the disputes as between the parties is protected.

8. She submits that the objections of the Respondent are misplaced and the reliefs as sought for are of such an emergent nature that they need to be granted in the present case. She submits that since the Respondent is in the business of perishable goods, and therefore, in the event that the reliefs as sought for are not granted i.e., protecting the amounts as sought for in the present Petition, the Respondent would take steps to dissipate the subject matter of the dispute.

9. This Court has he