Case Note & Summary
The applicant, C.J. Charles Rajkumar, proprietor of M/s Kiruba Constructions, filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking an ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents from dealing with, encumbering, or alienating a property described in the schedule. The property is the subject matter of Execution Petition No. 31 of 2023 pending before the Principal District Judge at Chengalpet. The applicant is the decree-holder in the underlying arbitration proceedings. The court heard both sides and, by order dated 27 February 2026, granted the injunction to protect the property pending execution. The court reasoned that without such interim protection, the decree could be frustrated if the respondents alienated the property. The application was allowed, and the respondents were restrained from alienating or encumbering the property until further orders.
Headnote
A) Arbitration - Interim Measures - Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Ad-interim Injunction - Applicant, decree-holder, sought injunction to restrain respondents from alienating property pending execution of arbitral award - Court granted injunction to protect the subject matter of execution petition - Held that interim protection is necessary to prevent frustration of decree (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether an ad-interim injunction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 should be granted to restrain the respondents from alienating the property which is the subject matter of an execution petition.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The respondents are restrained from in any manner dealing with, encumbering, or alienating the property more fully described in the schedule to the Judges Summons until further orders.
Law Points
- Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Order XIV Rule 8 of Madras High Court Original Side Rules
- 1956
- ad-interim injunction
- protection of property pending execution
Case Details
Mr. Srikanth for applicant, Mr. P.V. Balasubramanian (Senior Counsel) for Mr. M. Marudhachalam for R-1
C.J. Charles Rajkumar, Proprietor, M/s Kiruba Constructions
Mrs. Rahamathunnisa (died), Mr. I. Syed Ahmed, Mr. I. Haja Saibudin
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking ad-interim injunction to restrain alienation of property pending execution of an arbitral award.
Remedy Sought
Applicant (decree-holder) sought an order of ad-interim injunction restraining respondents from dealing with, encumbering, or alienating the property described in the schedule.
Filing Reason
To prevent the respondents from alienating the property which is the subject matter of Execution Petition No. 31 of 2023 pending before the Principal District Judge at Chengalpet, thereby protecting the decree-holder's interest.
Issues
Whether an ad-interim injunction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 should be granted to restrain the respondents from alienating the property which is the subject matter of an execution petition.
Submissions/Arguments
Heard both sides. No detailed arguments recorded in the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
An ad-interim injunction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can be granted to protect the subject matter of an execution petition pending execution of an arbitral award, to prevent frustration of the decree.
Judgment Excerpts
This is an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) seeking an order of ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents from alienating the property which forms the subject matter of the execution petition in EP 31 of 2023 on the file of the Principal District Judge at Chengalpet.
Heard both.
The applicant is the decree-holder.
Procedural History
The applicant filed O.A.No.1188 of 2025 under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Order XIV Rule 8 of the Madras High Court Original Side Rules, 1956, seeking an ad-interim injunction. The court heard both sides and passed the order on 27.2.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 9
- Madras High Court Original Side Rules, 1956: Order XIV Rule 8
