Section 9 Petition Converted to Section 17 Application Upon Consent Reference to Sole Arbitrator.

The Petitioner filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim reliefs against Respondent No. 1, including an injunction against the alienation of inventory (buses and chassis), disclosure of assets, and the appointment of a Local Commissioner

The dispute arose from a Tripartite Bus Sale Agreement dated 19.03.2025

During proceedings, all parties reached a consensus to refer the dispute to arbitration, bypassing the requirement for a formal Section 21 notice and a Section 11 petition

The Petitioner’s claims are valued at approximately Rs. 16 crores, while Respondents indicated counterclaims of approximately Rs. 10 crores

1. Whether the court should refer the dispute to a sole arbitrator based on the mutual consent of the parties and the existing arbitration clause

2. Whether the Section 9 petition for interim measures can be converted/treated as an application under Section 17 for adjudication by the arbitral tribunal

The court applied Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, regarding interim measures by the Court

It relied on the autonomy of parties to waive statutory mandates (such as Section 21 notice) and the procedure for appointment of arbitrators under Section 11

The court also invoked Section 17 of the Act, which empowers an Arbitral Tribunal to grant interim measures, and the Fourth Schedule of the Act for the determination of the arbitrator's fees

The court upheld the specific Dispute Resolution Clause (Clause 12.3) of the Tripartite Agreement

Given the consensus among the Petitioner and both Respondents, the Court determined there was no legal impediment to referring the matter to arbitration immediately

By recording the parties' agreement to dispense with the formal Section 11 petition process, the Court exercised its jurisdiction to facilitate an expedited resolution.

The Court integrated the existing Section 9 petition into the future arbitral proceedings by directing it to be treated as a Section 17 application, thereby ensuring that the prayer for interim relief is adjudicated by the specialized tribunal without re-filing

The Court ensured procedural compliance by requiring the arbitrator to provide disclosures under Section 12(2)

The Court ordered that the Section 9 petition be treated as a Section 17 application before the Arbitrator, who is requested to decide it expeditiously

Fees are to be governed by the Fourth Schedule and shared equally

All rights and contentions on merits remain open for the arbitrator's decision