Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ajazul Haque Khan, filed a petition under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging an order dated January 15, 2026, passed under Section 17 of the Act by the arbitral tribunal. The impugned order attached various bank accounts of the petitioner. The respondent, ICICI Bank Limited, opposed the petition. The court noted that the petitioner failed to make out a prima facie case or show irreparable loss. The balance of convenience was against the petitioner. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, upholding the attachment order.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Interim Measures - Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Attachment of Bank Accounts - The court considered whether the arbitral tribunal's order attaching the petitioner's bank accounts was proper. The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a prima facie case or irreparable loss, and the balance of convenience was against the petitioner. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned order under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 attaching the petitioner's bank accounts was justified and whether the appeal under Section 37 of the Act should be entertained.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The impugned order attaching the petitioner's bank accounts is upheld.
Law Points
- Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- Interim measures
- Attachment of bank accounts
- Prima facie case
- Balance of convenience
- Irreparable loss
Case Details
2026 LawText (BOM) (05) 25
Commercial Arbitration Petition (L) No. 16052 of 2026
Mr. Vijay S. Tiwari, Mr. Aayush Pandey for the Petitioner; Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar, Senior Counsel, Ms. Resham Vasant Savla i/b Manilal Kher Ambalal and Co. Advocates for Respondent
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against an interim order under Section 17 of the Act attaching bank accounts.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the order dated January 15, 2026 attaching his bank accounts.
Filing Reason
Petitioner challenged the arbitral tribunal's order attaching his bank accounts.
Previous Decisions
The arbitral tribunal passed an order under Section 17 of the Act on January 15, 2026, attaching various bank accounts of the petitioner.
Issues
Whether the impugned order under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 attaching the petitioner's bank accounts was justified.
Whether the appeal under Section 37 of the Act should be entertained.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the attachment order was unjustified.
Respondent opposed the petition, supporting the attachment order.
Ratio Decidendi
The petitioner failed to demonstrate a prima facie case or irreparable loss, and the balance of convenience was against the petitioner. Therefore, the appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was dismissed.
Judgment Excerpts
This is a Petition filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) impugning an order dated January 15, 2026 (“Impugned Order”) under Section 17 of the Act, attaching various bank accounts.
Procedural History
The arbitral tribunal passed an interim order under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on January 15, 2026, attaching the petitioner's bank accounts. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 37 of the Act before the Bombay High Court, which was dismissed on May 7, 2026.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 17, Section 37
