ABSTRACT
This chapter analyses whether it is efficacious for parties in international commercial arbitrations seated outside India to seek interim measures from an emergency arbitrator the arbitral tribunal and enforce the measures in India, or whether it is more efficient for parties to directly approach Indian courts for interim measures. The Delhi High Court observed that the Indian Arbitration Act does not contain provisions in pari material to Article 17H of the Model Law, and that Section 17 of the Act is clearly not applicable in relation to international commercial arbitrations seated outside India. As interim orders granted by foreign-seated arbitral tribunals do not have a direct enforcement mechanism under the Indian Arbitration Act, judicial intervention under Section 9 remains the sole effective avenue for seeking interim relief in India in the case of foreign-seated arbitrations.
