Emergency Arbitration in India: Urgent Relief Before the Tribunal Is Formed

Sometimes a dispute cannot wait for an arbitral tribunal to be formed. A counterparty may be about to sell the shares, encash a guarantee, terminate a licence or move assets. In ad hoc arbitration, the only option before the tribunal is constituted is to go to court under Section 9. But if the contract adopts institutional rules that provide for an emergency arbitrator, a party can ask the institution to appoint one within a day or two, and get an interim order within days, without going to court.

This guide is for businesses facing urgent situations and those drafting clauses. In short: an emergency arbitrator is appointed by an institution under its rules to decide urgent interim applications before the main tribunal exists; emergency arbitration is available only where the parties have chosen institutional rules that provide for it; for an India-seated arbitration, the Supreme Court held in Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings v Future Retail (2021) that an emergency arbitrator's order is an order under Section 17(1) and enforceable under Section 17(2); for a foreign-seated arbitration, an emergency order is not directly enforceable in India, and the party must seek relief from an Indian court under Section 9; and the Arbitration Act does not yet expressly refer to emergency arbitrators, though a pending amendment bill would change that.

For urgent relief against Indian assets, the choice between an emergency arbitrator and a Section 9 court petition is often the first strategic decision in the dispute.

The short answer

If your contract provides for arbitration under rules such as those of DIAC, MCIA, SIAC or ICC, you can file an application for emergency interim relief with the institution, even before you file your main claim or the tribunal is constituted. The institution appoints an emergency arbitrator, usually within one or two days. The emergency arbitrator fixes a short timetable, hears both sides, often by video, and decides the application, usually within one to two weeks. The order binds the parties until the main tribunal reviews it. If the arbitration is seated in India, the order can be enforced through the court like an order of the tribunal under Section 17. If it is seated abroad, you will need to go to an Indian court under Section 9 to get enforceable relief in India.

Emergency arbitration at a glance

Amazon v Future Retail (2021)

The dispute arose from a series of agreements between Amazon, Future Coupons and Future Retail, with arbitration under the SIAC Rules seated in New Delhi. When Future Retail moved to transfer its retail business to another group, Amazon applied to an SIAC emergency arbitrator, who granted an interim award restraining the transaction. Future Retail argued that the Arbitration Act did not recognise emergency arbitrators, so the award had no legal effect in India.

The Supreme Court rejected that argument. It held that Section 2(6) and Section 19 of the Act allow parties to agree on institutional rules, including rules providing for emergency arbitrators; that an "arbitral tribunal" in Section 17(1) includes an emergency arbitrator appointed under such rules; and that an emergency arbitrator's order is therefore an order under Section 17(1), enforceable under Section 17(2) as if it were a court order. It also held that no appeal lies under Section 37 against an order of the court enforcing such an emergency award. The decision gave emergency arbitration in India-seated cases firm legal footing.

When emergency arbitration helps

Foreign-seated emergency orders

Where the arbitration is seated outside India, Part I of the Act generally does not apply, but the proviso to Section 2(2) makes Section 9 available for international commercial arbitrations seated abroad, unless the parties agree otherwise. Section 17, however, is not included, so a foreign-seated emergency arbitrator's order cannot be enforced in India under Section 17(2). Nor is an interim order a final "foreign award" enforceable under Part II.

In Raffles Design International India v Educomp Professional Education (2016), the Delhi High Court held that a party with a foreign emergency order could not enforce it directly, but could file a Section 9 petition, and the court would consider the matter independently, though it could take the emergency arbitrator's reasoning into account. This remains the practical route: obtain the emergency order abroad if useful, and file a Section 9 petition in the Indian court where the assets or the counterparty are, relying on the order as part of the case.

How to seek emergency relief

Emergency arbitrator or Section 9?

Both routes can give fast relief. A Section 9 court petition has some advantages: courts can grant orders binding third parties, such as banks, which an emergency arbitrator cannot; court orders are directly enforceable; and courts can grant orders without notice to the other side in very urgent cases. On the other hand, court hearings can be delayed by listing, and Section 9(3) provides that once the tribunal is constituted, courts should not entertain Section 9 applications unless the tribunal's remedy is not efficacious.

An emergency arbitrator offers a dedicated decision-maker, confidentiality and speed without court listing. For India-seated arbitrations after Amazon, the order is enforceable. For foreign-seated ones, it is not, which reduces its value against Indian assets. Many parties choose a Section 9 petition for relief that needs to bind third parties or be enforced immediately in India, and an emergency arbitrator where speed and the parties' own compliance are enough.

Institutional rules compared

Most leading institutions now provide for emergency arbitrators, with broadly similar features and some differences in detail. The Delhi International Arbitration Centre's 2023 rules provide for an emergency arbitrator to be appointed quickly on application, with a short timetable for a decision. The Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration's rules contain similar provisions. The SIAC Rules, in their 2025 edition, provide for emergency arbitrators and also introduced a mechanism for preliminary orders that can be sought without notice in limited circumstances. The ICC Rules provide for an emergency arbitrator under Article 29 and Appendix V, with an order usually within 15 days of the file reaching the emergency arbitrator.

The rules generally allow parties to opt out, and some apply only to arbitration agreements concluded after the rules came into force. Check the version of the rules your contract adopts and whether it contains an opt-out, before planning an emergency application.

The test for emergency relief

Emergency arbitrators apply tests similar to those courts use for interim injunctions: a good arguable case, often described as a reasonable possibility of success on the merits; a risk of irreparable or serious harm that cannot be adequately compensated by damages if the relief is refused; a balance of convenience in favour of granting relief; and real urgency, meaning that the relief cannot wait for the constitution of the tribunal. Under Indian law, Section 17 incorporates the same powers as the court has under Section 9, and the familiar principles apply.

The application should therefore be supported by evidence: the contract, correspondence showing the threat, documents showing the imminent step (a board resolution, a sale agreement, a termination notice), and an explanation of why damages would not be enough. An emergency arbitrator is less likely to grant relief on a bare assertion of urgency.

Costs of emergency arbitration

Institutions charge an application fee and require a deposit towards the emergency arbitrator's fees, which varies by institution and is fixed in the rules. Indian institutions' fees are generally lower than those of foreign institutions. Legal costs for preparing the application and attending the hearing within a short time can be significant. The emergency arbitrator may allocate costs, and the main tribunal can review this in the final award. Compare the cost with that of a Section 9 petition, which involves court fees and legal costs but no arbitrator's fee.

Drafting for emergency relief

If you want emergency arbitration to be available, choose institutional rules that provide for it, do not opt out, and choose an Indian seat if the relief is likely to be needed against Indian parties or assets, so that Amazon applies. It is also sensible to state expressly that the parties may seek interim relief from the courts under Section 9 notwithstanding the emergency arbitrator provisions, to preserve both routes. For cross-border contracts with a foreign seat, recognise that an emergency order will not be directly enforceable in India, and plan to rely on Section 9 for Indian assets. See arbitration clause drafting and emergency arbitration.

The pending amendment

The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024 proposes to recognise emergency arbitrators expressly, allowing parties to seek interim relief from an emergency arbitrator appointed under institutional rules before the tribunal is constituted, and treating such orders as enforceable like orders of the tribunal. As of October 2026, the Bill is still pending. Until it is passed, the position for India-seated arbitrations rests on Amazon v Future Retail, which is binding law, and for foreign-seated ones on Section 9.

After the emergency order

An emergency arbitrator's order is temporary by design. Most rules require the applicant to start the main arbitration, if it has not already, within a short period, and provide that the order lapses if it does not. Once the main tribunal is constituted, it can confirm, modify or vacate the emergency order, and it is not bound by the emergency arbitrator's reasoning. The emergency arbitrator usually cannot then sit on the main tribunal unless the parties agree.

The party that obtained the order should therefore move quickly to constitute the tribunal and seek continuation of the relief. The party subject to the order should comply, while preparing to ask the main tribunal to vacate it. Non-compliance with an India-seated emergency order can be dealt with by the court under Section 17(2), including by contempt-like consequences under the CPC.

Mistakes to avoid

Applying for an emergency arbitrator when the rules adopted do not provide for one, or the parties opted out. Relying on a foreign-seated emergency order to bind Indian assets without filing a Section 9 petition. Seeking relief against a third party, such as a bank, which an emergency arbitrator cannot bind. Waiting too long, so that urgency is no longer credible. Failing to start the main arbitration in time, so that the order lapses. And filing parallel applications before an emergency arbitrator and a court for the same relief, which invites criticism and may be treated as forum shopping.

Related pages

See interim relief under Section 9, interim measures under Section 17, and ad hoc vs institutional arbitration for why the choice of rules decides whether an emergency arbitrator is available at all.