Courts Should Not Withhold Relief Under Section 9 of Arbitration Act for Want of Technical or Procedural Requirements Prescribed by CPC

Our undertakings for long-term impact are an organic extension of our purpose.

They are to employ our deep knowledge of the law beyond the business, the transaction, the deal. To use the opportunities and skills we possess, to reflect on the culture we’re creating. Individually and collectively, these are our efforts to help shape the thinking of our future generations, and arm them with strategies for true, sustainable growth.

Sep 30, 2022

Courts Should Not Withhold Relief Under Section 9 of Arbitration Act for Want of Technical or Procedural Requirements Prescribed by CPC

In Essar House (P) Ltd. v. Arcellor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd.,^[1] the SC held that in deciding a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Arbitration Act’), the Court cannot ignore the basic principles of the CPC. At the same time, the power of the Court to grant relief is not curtailed by the rigors of every procedural provision in the CPC. In exercise of its powers to grant interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, the Court is not strictly bound by the provisions of the CPC.

[1] Essar House (P) Ltd. v. Arcellor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1219.

DISCLAIMER

These are the views and opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firm. This article is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal or other advice and you acknowledge that there is no relationship (implied, legal or fiduciary) between you and the author/AZB. AZB does not claim that the article's content or information is accurate, correct or complete, and disclaims all liability for any loss or damage caused through error or omission.