Unsuccessful Parties Can Seek Interim Relief in Arbitration Case
Supreme Court Expands Section 9 Rights
Higher Threshold for Losing Parties
By Legal Reporter
New Delhi: April 26, 2026:
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that even an unsuccessful party in arbitration can seek interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, at the post-award stage. This expands the scope of protection available during Section 34 challenge proceedings, though relief will be granted only under strict judicial scrutiny.
To understand how courts resolve inheritance disputes and assess competing claims of legal heirs, read the detailed judgment analysis of Savitri Bai & Another vs Savitri Bai , highlighting key legal principles on succession, property rights, and evidentiary evaluation in civil litigation.
Background
Arbitration in India is designed to provide speedy resolution of disputes with limited court interference. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, lays down the framework for arbitration, including provisions for interim measures under Section 9 and challenges to awards under Section 34. Traditionally, courts and commentators debated whether losing parties could invoke Section 9 after an award was rendered.
In Home Care Retail Marts Pvt. Ltd. v. Haresh N. Sanghavi (2026 INSC 415), the Supreme Court resolved this controversy, holding that any party to an arbitration agreement—including an unsuccessful one—may seek interim measures under Section 9 at the post-award stage.
Key Legal Provisions Discussed
| Provision | Scope | Court’s Clarification |
| Section 9, Arbitration Act, 1996 | Allows parties to seek interim measures before, during, or after arbitration. | Available to both successful and unsuccessful parties post-award, but subject to higher scrutiny. |
| Section 34, Arbitration Act, 1996 | Provides grounds to challenge arbitral awards. | Interim relief under Section 9 may be sought to preserve subject matter pending Section 34 challenge. |
| Section 36, Arbitration Act, 1996 | Deals with enforcement and stay of arbitral awards. | Operates separately from Section 9; one protects subject matter, the other addresses enforceability. |
| Section 2(h), Arbitration Act, 1996 | Defines “party” to an arbitration agreement. | Cannot be restricted to “successful” parties; applies equally to all. |
Supreme Court’s Reasoning
- Literal Interpretation: The Court emphasized that Parliament deliberately expanded Section 9 to include the post-award stage without limiting it to successful parties.
- Distinct Spheres of Section 9 and Section 36: Section 9 protects the subject matter or amount in dispute, while Section 36 deals with enforceability of awards.
- Possibility of Award Modification: Referring to Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies Ltd. (2025), the Court noted that awards can be modified or severed. Thus, an “unsuccessful” party might later succeed, making interim protection necessary.
- High Threshold for Relief: Courts must exercise caution, granting relief only in rare and compelling cases to prevent irreparable prejudice.
Divergent High Court Views
- Restrictive View (Bombay, Delhi, Madras, Karnataka): Held that interim measures post-award were meant only to protect the fruits of arbitration, available only to successful parties.
- Inclusive View (Telangana, Gujarat, Punjab & Haryana): Held that Section 9 applies to all parties, regardless of success or failure.
The Supreme Court sided with the inclusive view, declaring restrictive interpretations as “not good law.”
Implications of the Judgment
- Expanded Rights for Losing Parties: Even unsuccessful parties can seek interim protection, ensuring fairness during Section 34 challenges.
- Judicial Safeguards: Relief will be rare and subject to strict scrutiny, preventing misuse.
- Strengthening Arbitration Framework: Clarifies statutory interpretation, aligning Indian arbitration law with principles of fairness and efficiency.
- Commercial Certainty: Businesses now have clearer guidance on remedies available post-award.
[RESEARCH RESOURCES]
BUY & READ THE BOOK, WILL WRITING SIMPLIFIED, By Dr Ravinder Kumar Anand. [📘 Buy Will Writing Simplified online: Amazon | Flipkart ]
FAQ: Quick Understanding of Key Legal Points
Q1: What is Section 9 of the Arbitration Act?
It allows parties to seek interim measures (like injunctions or asset protection) before, during, or after arbitration.
Q2: Can losing parties seek interim relief under Section 9?
Yes. The Supreme Court held that even unsuccessful parties may apply for interim measures post-award.
Q3: Why is the threshold higher for losing parties?
Because granting relief to an unsuccessful party risks undermining the award. Courts will allow it only in rare, compelling cases.
Q4: How does Section 9 differ from Section 36?
Section 9 protects the subject matter or disputed amount, while Section 36 deals with enforcement and stay of awards.
Q5: What happens if the award is later modified?
An unsuccessful party may eventually succeed under Section 34. Interim relief ensures their rights are not lost during the challenge.
Q6: Which High Courts previously denied relief to losing parties?
Bombay, Delhi, Madras, and Karnataka. The Supreme Court has now overruled these restrictive interpretations.
Context for Citations
This article is based on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Home Care Retail Marts Pvt. Ltd. v. Haresh N. Sanghavi (2026 INSC 415). The judgment clarified that Section 9 interim relief is available to all parties, including unsuccessful ones, subject to strict judicial scrutiny. This context ensures references are tied to authoritative judicial pronouncements and statutory provisions.
.