Delhi HC Converts Radisson’s Section 9 Plea Into Section 17 Application, Keeps RPHL’s Statement In Force Until Tribunal Rules

Radisson had issued a notice invoking arbitration dated 3 May 2026 and nominated Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed (Retd.), an arbitrator on the Indian Council of Arbitration (ICA) panel.

The parties agreed that the pending Section 9 petition could be treated as an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and that the arbitration would proceed under the ICA Rules.

They also agreed to waive the arbitration clause’s requirement that arbitrators have hospitality-industry experience.

Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for court-ordered interim measures, while Section 17 provides for interim measures by the arbitral tribunal.

The tribunal’s constitution and administration of the arbitration were to follow the ICA Rules, as agreed by the parties.

The order did not determine the existence, validity, enforceability, or scope of the arbitration agreement, or the tribunal’s jurisdiction; those matters were expressly left open.

In light of the parties’ agreement, the Court directed that Radisson’s 3 May 2026 notice be treated as the invocation of arbitration and its nominee be treated as its nominated arbitrator.

RPHL was to nominate an arbitrator from the ICA panel within 30 days, after which the ICA was to appoint the presiding arbitrator within 30 days.

The parties’ agreement to proceed under the ICA Rules and waive the hospitality-experience requirement enabled the tribunal’s constitution on those terms.

The Court converted the Section 9 petition into a Section 17 application for the tribunal’s consideration, but preserved all objections—including jurisdictional objections—and expressed no view on the merits or the arbitration agreement.

It directed constitution of the tribunal under the ICA Rules, converted the pending Section 9 petition into a Section 17 application, and required the tribunal to decide that application within six weeks of its constitution.

RPHL’s statement recorded in the order dated 1 December 2025 was to remain operative until the tribunal made an appropriate order on the Section 17 application.

All rights and contentions, including objections to the tribunal’s jurisdiction and the merits, were reserved.