Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner, M/s. Pioneer Constructions, filed a Commercial Arbitration Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim measures before the commencement of arbitral proceedings. The Petitioner also filed a Commercial Arbitration Application under Section 11 of the Act for appointment of an arbitrator, which was taken up for analogous hearing. The dispute arose out of a Development Agreement between the Petitioner and the Respondent, Sahakarnagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. The Petitioner apprehended that the Respondent-Society was likely to execute a Development Agreement with a new developer, as the Society had already passed a resolution in a General Body Meeting held on 10 January 2026 appointing a new developer. A Special General Body Meeting was scheduled for 23 April 2026 to finalize the draft of the Development Agreement with the new developer. The Petitioner sought an injunction restraining the Respondent from acting upon the resolution dated 10 January 2026 and from executing any development agreement with the new developer. The Court considered the submissions of both parties. The Petitioner argued that it had a valid and subsisting Development Agreement with the Society and that the Society's attempt to appoint a new developer was in breach of that agreement. The Respondent contended that the Petitioner had failed to perform its obligations under the agreement and that the Society was entitled to appoint a new developer. The Court analyzed the facts and legal principles governing interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act. The Court held that the Petitioner had made out a prima facie case, the balance of convenience was in favor of the Petitioner, and irreparable injury would be caused if the injunction was not granted. The Court granted interim relief restraining the Respondent from acting upon the resolution dated 10 January 2026 and from executing any development agreement with the new developer pending the arbitral proceedings. The Court also appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Act to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
Headnote
A) Arbitration - Interim Measures - Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Injunction restraining execution of development agreement - Petitioner-developer sought to restrain society from acting on resolution appointing new developer and from executing development agreement with new developer - Court held that Petitioner made out a prima facie case, balance of convenience in its favor, and irreparable injury would be caused if injunction not granted - Held that interim protection is necessary to preserve the subject matter of arbitration (Paras 1-26).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Petitioner is entitled to interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 restraining the Respondent-Society from executing a development agreement with a new developer pending the arbitral proceedings.
Final Decision
The Court allowed the Section 9 Petition and granted interim relief restraining the Respondent from acting upon the resolution dated 10 January 2026 and from executing any development agreement with the new developer pending the arbitral proceedings. The Court also appointed an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Act.
Law Points
- Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Interim measures before arbitral proceedings
- Prima facie case
- Balance of convenience
- Irreparable injury
- Appointment of arbitrator under Section 11
- Development agreement dispute
