Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 answers this problem. It is court support for arbitration. It does not decide the final dispute. That remains for the arbitral tribunal. Section 9 ensures that the arbitral process does not become ineffective before it begins, during its pendency, or after the award but before enforcement.

Nature And Scope

Section 9 permits a party to seek interim measures before commencement of arbitral proceedings, during arbitral proceedings, or after the award but before enforcement under Section 36. The court may order preservation, interim custody or sale of goods, securing the amount in dispute, inspection of property, injunction, receiver, or such other interim measure as may appear just and convenient.

The provision is wide because arbitration disputes are varied. They may concern money, land, machinery, securities, bank guarantees, shares, receivables or contractual rights. But Section 9 is protective, not adjudicatory. Urgency may justify protection. It does not justify premature adjudication. The real question is simple: is protection necessary so that arbitration remains meaningful?

Before Arbitration Begins

Section 9 is often most useful before tribunal constitution. The arbitration clause may exist and the dispute may have arisen. But until the tribunal is in place, the party requiring protection may have no effective arbitral forum.

The Supreme Court recognised this in Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. NEPC India Ltd., (1999) 2 SCC 479, holding that Section 9 relief may be sought even before commencement of arbitral proceedings. In Firm Ashok Traders v. Gurumukh Das Saluja, (2004) 3 SCC 155, the Court clarified that a party seeking pre-arbitration relief must show a manifest intention to commence arbitration.

This safeguard matters. Section 9 before arbitration is not a pressure tactic or a civil suit in disguise. The applicant must identify the arbitration agreement, show that the dispute is arbitrable, connect the relief with that dispute, and be ready to invoke arbitration.

Section 9(2) adds a timeline. If interim protection is granted before commencement, arbitration must commence within ninety days from the date of the order, or within further time as the court may determine. Do not file Section 9 first and think about arbitration later.

During Arbitration: Section 17

Once the tribunal is constituted, the position changes. After the 2015 amendments, tribunals have substantial powers under Section 17. Section 9(3) therefore provides that once the tribunal has been constituted, the court shall not entertain a Section 9 application unless circumstances exist which may render the remedy under Section 17 inefficacious.

This is a statutory filter. Once the tribunal exists, it is ordinarily the first forum for interim relief. Preference for a court order is not inefficacy.

In Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. v. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd., the Supreme Court clarified that Section 9 is not completely barred after constitution of the tribunal. The court may still entertain it if Section 17 is not efficacious.

The enquiry is practical. Can the tribunal act in time? Can it grant effective relief? Is there imminent risk before it can intervene? Are court powers or third-party directions required? A petition filed after constitution must answer these questions directly.

Bank Guarantees and Securities

A large part of Section 9 litigation concerns bank guarantees and performance securities. Courts do not lightly restrain unconditional bank guarantees. The reason is commercial certainty. Such guarantees are meant to be honoured according to their terms.

The exceptions are narrow. A party seeking restraint must usually establish egregious fraud, irretrievable injustice, or compelling special equities. The Supreme Court's decisions in U.P. State Sugar Corporation v. Sumac International Ltd., (1997) 1 SCC 568 and Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd. v. Coal Tar Refining Co., (2007) 8 SCC 110 remain central.

It is not enough to say that invocation is wrongful, disputes are pending, or hardship will follow. Those may be arbitration issues. They do not stop an unconditional bank guarantee.

Securing The Claim and Assets

Section 9 is also used to secure the amount in dispute or prevent dissipation of assets. This is legitimate where the respondent is transferring assets, diverting receivables, closing operations, moving funds, or otherwise making the award practically unenforceable.

But Section 9 does not convert every money claim into a secured claim. A pending claim is not enough. Fear of non-payment is not enough. The applicant must place credible material before the court: conduct, correspondence, transactions, evasive replies, financial indicators, threatened alienation, or some other real basis for apprehension.

Chronology is often decisive. When did the risk arise? What document shows the danger? Why is immediate protection necessary? A good petition answers these questions before the judge has to ask them.

Post-Award Relief

Section 9 does not end with the award. It expressly applies after the making of the award but before enforcement. This matters because winning an award is not the same as recovering under it. An award-debtor may transfer assets, close accounts or divert receivables before enforcement becomes effective.

The issue has also arisen in foreign award matters. In Osterreichischer Lloyd Seereederei (Cyprus) Ltd. v. Victore Ships Pvt. Ltd., 2026:BHC-OS:6178, the Bombay High Court considered Section 9 protection where recognition and enforcement of a foreign award under Part II was pending. This is a High Court decision, not a Supreme Court declaration. But the logic is clear. An award must remain capable of enforcement.

Principles, Jurisdiction and Drafting

Section 9 power is wide, but it is exercised on settled principles. The applicant must show a prima facie case, balance of convenience, urgency and prejudice. Where injunction is sought, injunction and specific relief principles remain relevant. In Adhunik Steels Ltd. v. Orissa Manganese and Minerals (P) Ltd., (2007) 7 SCC 125, the Supreme Court cautioned that Section 9 relief must remain consistent with settled principles governing interim injunctions and specific relief.

Jurisdiction depends on the arbitration clause, seat, cause of action, nature of dispute, location of assets, value of claim, the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the distinction between domestic arbitration and international commercial arbitration, and prior applications under Part I. In some cases, Section 42 may also matter.

A Section 9 petition must read like an urgent application for protection, not a final statement of claim. Vague prayers restraining “adverse steps” are weak. What adverse steps? Which property? Which bank guarantee? Courts grant orders that can be understood and implemented. They are slow to grant fog.

Section 9 is one of the most valuable remedies in Indian arbitration. It operates before arbitration begins, during arbitration where Section 17 is not efficacious, and after the award where enforcement may be frustrated.

But it must be used with discipline. The applicant must show urgency, risk, jurisdiction, precise relief, credible material and a genuine connection with arbitration. Used properly, Section 9 protects arbitration. Used loosely, it becomes another layer of litigation. Arbitration should not arrive too late. But the court should not arrive unnecessarily either.

Author: Dr. Rishabh Gandhi - Advocate, Rishabh Gandhi and Advocates. Views are personal.