Section 9 relief may precede a Section 21 notice if arbitration is genuinely pursued.

The Applicant sought interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, concerning a registered Development Agreement dated 29 November 2024 for redevelopment of “Delana” in Chembur, Mumbai.

The Agreement provided for eight flats of 600 sq. ft. each for the Respondents and contained an arbitration clause.

The Applicant alleged that, after taking steps and incurring expenditure on the project, it was obstructed by the Respondents’ communication to the Society dated 17 December 2025, which allegedly contributed to the withholding of a further NOC.

The Respondents objected that no Section 21 notice had been issued, that the Applicant had not shown a genuine intention to arbitrate, and that the requested orders would grant final relief at an interim stage.

After the matter was fixed for judgment, the Court was informed that the Respondents had terminated the Applicant’s Agreement.

1. Whether the Section 9 petition was maintainable despite the absence of a prior notice invoking arbitration under Section 21.

2. Whether the Applicant had shown a genuine intention to refer the dispute to arbitration.

3. Whether the Applicant established grounds for interim protection, including a direction to withdraw the communication to the Society, or whether the reliefs would impermissibly grant final relief.

Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 permits a party to seek interim measures before arbitral proceedings commence; a prior Section 21 notice is not invariably a prerequisite, but the applicant must genuinely intend to arbitrate (Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. NEPC India Ltd., (1999) 2 SCC 479; Firm Ashok Traders v. Gurumukh Das Saluja, (2004) 3 SCC 155).

Under Section 9(2), where interim measures are granted before arbitration begins, proceedings must commence within 90 days or such further time as the Court allows.

Interim relief should preserve the efficacy of arbitration and is assessed by reference to a prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury (ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. v. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd., (2022) 1 SCC 712).

An interim mandatory injunction requires a stronger case, necessity to prevent serious or irreparable injury, and a balance of convenience favouring relief (Dorab Cawasji Warden v. Coomi Sorab Warden, (1990) 2 SCC 117).

Once constituted, the arbitral tribunal may grant interim measures under Section 17.

The Court held that the lack of a Section 21 notice did not by itself defeat the petition, and the Agreement’s arbitration clause, the pleaded dispute, and the Applicant’s stated intention to seek specific performance supported a genuine arbitral purpose; however, that intention had to be acted upon promptly.

For interim relief, the registered Agreement and the Society letter of 29 November 2024 prima facie supported the Applicant’s account of the Respondents’ agreed entitlement, while the Respondents’ claims to greater benefits remained for arbitration.

The alleged obstruction, the project steps already taken, and Clause 85’s provision that ordinary contractual disputes should not stall construction supported limited protection.

Applying the interim-relief principles, the Court found that preventing obstruction and requiring withdrawal of the relevant communication, limited to contractual disputes and not title or other lawful issues, would protect the project without finally deciding the parties’ substantive rights.

It restrained the Respondents from obstructing redevelopment, required them to cooperate with steps required under the Agreement, and restrained inconsistent third-party rights and communications intended to stop redevelopment or force renegotiation, subject to exceptions for lawful remedies and genuine issues.

The Respondents were directed, within seven days, to withdraw the 17 December 2025 communication insofar as it sought to withhold permissions merely because of contractual disputes; the Society was not directed to grant the final NOC.

The Applicant was directed to issue a Section 21 notice within 14 days and commence arbitration within the period under Section 9(2); the interim measures were to remain in force for 90 days, subject to commencement of arbitration and any subsequent Section 17 relief.

The merits were left open for the arbitral tribunal, and, in light of the reported termination of the Agreement, the Applicant was left at liberty to pursue appropriate proceedings.