Dispute Resolution & Litigation

Interim Relief in Arbitration Under Section 9: What Courts Can and Cannot Do

Reviewed by CA Nikhil Gupta · Last reviewed 14 July 2026

CA Nikhil Gupta·July 2026· Section 9, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ARBITRATION

Arbitration takes time to set up — but a dispute sometimes needs urgent action before a tribunal even exists. Section 9 exists specifically to bridge that gap, letting a party go to court for interim protection without abandoning arbitration as the actual dispute-resolution mechanism.

What Section 9 actually allows

Section 9 lets a party apply to a court for interim measures of protection at three distinct stages: before arbitral proceedings begin, during the arbitral proceedings, or after the award is made but before it is enforced. This is a deliberate carve-out from arbitration's general principle of court non-interference — recognising that urgent protective measures sometimes cannot wait for a tribunal to be constituted and get up to speed.

What kind of relief a court can grant

Interim custody or sale of goods that are the subject matter of the dispute.
Securing the amount in dispute — for example, an order to deposit disputed funds or provide security.
Interim injunctions — restraining a party from specific conduct (disposing of assets, breaching a restrictive covenant) pending resolution.
Appointment of a receiver where appropriate to protect the subject matter of the dispute.
Other interim measures the court considers "just and convenient" in the circumstances.

The key limitation once a tribunal is functioning

⚠ Courts generally step back once the arbitral tribunal is up and running: Under Section 9(3), once an arbitral tribunal has been constituted, a court will generally not entertain a Section 9 application unless the court finds that circumstances exist which may render the remedy provided by the tribunal itself (under the Act's equivalent interim-relief provision for tribunals, Section 17) inefficacious. This reflects a deliberate policy shift — once the tribunal exists and can grant its own interim relief, parties are meant to go to the tribunal, not use Section 9 as a parallel, ongoing recourse to courts.

Why this matters at the pre-arbitration stage specifically

The most practically important use of Section 9 is often before arbitration has even formally commenced — a party who fears the other side may dissipate assets, destroy evidence, or take other prejudicial action while the arbitration is being set up (appointing arbitrators, agreeing procedural timetables) can go straight to court for urgent protective relief, without needing to wait for the tribunal to exist first.

Does seeking Section 9 relief waive the right to arbitrate?

No — seeking interim relief under Section 9 is explicitly designed to be compatible with, and supportive of, the parties' underlying arbitration agreement, not a waiver of it. A party is not treated as abandoning arbitration by using Section 9 for urgent protective measures; the two are meant to work together, with the substantive dispute still proceeding to arbitration as agreed.

Practical considerations before filing

A Section 9 application requires demonstrating the standard interim-relief tests courts generally apply — a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable harm if relief is not granted — the mere existence of an arbitration agreement doesn't lower this bar; a party still needs a genuinely urgent, well-evidenced case for interim protection, not simply a desire to get an early procedural advantage.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a party seek Section 9 relief in a jurisdiction different from the arbitration's seat? ▼

Section 9 applications are generally filed before the court that would have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the arbitration, which is typically tied to the seat — filing in an unrelated jurisdiction risks the application being challenged on jurisdictional grounds, so this should be assessed carefully alongside the specific arbitration agreement's seat provision.

If a court grants Section 9 interim relief, does that decide any part of the actual dispute's merits? ▼

No — interim relief under Section 9 is specifically protective/preservative in nature, intended to maintain the status quo or protect the subject matter pending resolution, and is not meant to be a determination of the underlying dispute's merits, which remains for the arbitral tribunal to decide.

Can a party get Section 9 relief after the arbitral award has already been made? ▼

Yes — Section 9 specifically contemplates relief "after making of the arbitral award but before it is enforced," addressing situations where a party fears the losing side might take steps (dissipating assets, for example) to frustrate enforcement of an award that has already been issued but not yet formally enforced through the courts.

Source and review trail

Use the current official instrument, portal or regulator publication before acting. This panel separates the category authority from page-specific references.

Primary category: Dispute Resolution & Litigation
Official starting point: www.incometax.gov.in

Page source links

The prior page did not embed a page-specific external source. The category authority above is the minimum verification starting point; a specific instrument should be added when available.