Interim Relief and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in India (2026): a Practical Guide for Parties and Counsel

Enforcing foreign arbitral awards in India has never been a straightforward exercise, but a cluster of High Court and Supreme Court decisions in March–April 2026 has sharpened one question above all others: can a party obtain interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 while a petition for enforcement of a foreign award is still being adjudicated? The emerging judicial answer, that Section 9 remains available until the foreign award is formally declared enforceable and crystallises into a decree, carries immediate tactical consequences for claimants racing to preserve assets, respondents seeking to resist attachment, and counsel coordinating multi-jurisdictional enforcement campaigns.

This guide sets out the governing statutory framework, analyses the 2026 case law, and provides stepwise checklists that India-focused practitioners can deploy today.

Executive Summary, The Decision Point (Why This Matters Now)

The central development is this: Indian courts have confirmed that the window for Section 9 interim measures does not close simply because an enforcement petition under Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed. A literal interpretation of Section 9, upheld in a Supreme Court judgment dated 24 April 2026, provides that the right to seek interim relief is available to any party “at any time after the making of the arbitral award but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36 of the Act. ” For foreign-seated arbitral awards, enforcement under Section 36 is not directly triggered; instead, the award must first pass through the recognition gateway of Sections 47–49.

Until a court formally declares the award enforceable, at which point it becomes a decree, the enforcement process remains incomplete, and Section 9 relief stays on the table.

This interpretation was applied in a widely reported Bombay High Court ruling, which held that interim relief on a foreign arbitral award remains available even after an enforcement plea has been filed, provided the award has not yet attained the status of a decree. Industry observers expect this position to be adopted consistently across other High Courts, although early indications from Kerala and Madras suggest those benches are approaching the question on similar lines.

For practitioners, the immediate tactical checklist is as follows:

• Audit the status of the award. Has the enforcement petition been filed? Has it been adjudicated? Only a judicially confirmed decree closes the Section 9 window.
• File Section 9 early. If asset dissipation is a risk, file the Section 9 application concurrently with, or even before, the enforcement petition.
• Prepare evidence of urgency. Courts require prima facie evidence that the opposing party may dissipate or remove assets from the jurisdiction.
• Anticipate Section 9(3) objections. The respondent will argue that the arbitral tribunal (or an emergency arbitrator) provides an adequate alternative remedy.
• Coordinate multi-jurisdictional enforcement. Indian interim relief may complement parallel asset-freezing in the seat of arbitration or other enforcement-friendly jurisdictions.
• Monitor decree conversion. Once the award becomes a decree, pivot from Section 9 applications to execution proceedings under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legal Framework for Enforcing Foreign Arbitral Awards in India, Statutes and Standards

India’s legal architecture for recognising and enforcing foreign arbitral awards rests on three pillars: the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the “Act”), which domesticates India’s obligations under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention, 1958), and the residual provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 governing execution of decrees. Understanding how these instruments interact is essential before any tactical choices can be made.

Section 9, Text and Interpretation

Section 9(1) of the Act empowers a party to apply to a court for interim measures of protection “before, or during arbitral proceedings, or at any time after the making of the arbitral award but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36. ” The critical phrase is “enforced in accordance with Section 36. ” For domestic awards governed by Part I of the Act, Section 36 provides that an award shall be enforced as if it were a decree of the court once the time for filing a setting-aside application under Section 34 has expired (or the application has been refused). For foreign-seated arbitral awards governed by Part II, however, Section 36 has no direct application.

Instead, enforcement is governed by Sections 44–49 (for New York Convention awards) or Sections 53–60 (for Geneva Convention awards).

This structural difference creates what practitioners commonly call the “decree gap.” A foreign award does not become enforceable, and does not attain the status of a decree, until the court has adjudicated the enforcement petition and satisfied itself that none of the grounds for refusal under Section 48 exist. Only then does Section 49 operate to convert the award into a decree. The likely practical effect is that Section 9 interim relief remains available throughout the enforcement process for foreign awards, from the moment the award is rendered until the moment it becomes a decree.

Sections 47–49, Recognising Foreign Arbitral Awards in India

The enforcement of foreign awards under Part II follows a structured three-stage process. Section 47 sets out the evidentiary requirements that the applicant must satisfy at the time of filing. Section 48 enumerates the limited grounds on which enforcement may be refused. Section 49 provides that where the court is satisfied that the foreign award is enforceable, it “shall be deemed to be a decree of that court.” The table below maps each stage to its legal consequence and practical effect on interim relief.

Recent Case Law (March–April 2026), What Has Changed

The legal position described above was previously a matter of academic commentary and lower-court dicta. The March–April 2026 rulings have elevated it to binding or highly persuasive authority across multiple High Courts.

Bombay High Court, Interim Relief Available Until Award Becomes a Decree

The Bombay High Court directly addressed the “decree gap” question and held that interim relief on a foreign arbitral award remains available even after an enforcement plea has been filed, provided the award has not yet crystallised into a decree under Section 49. The court reasoned that the text of Section 9 draws a clear line: interim measures are available “before [the award] is enforced.” For a foreign award, enforcement is not complete until the court has adjudicated the Section 48 defences and the award has been deemed a decree. Until that point, the court retains jurisdiction to entertain a Section 9 application.

Tactical implication: Claimants should file their Section 9 application at the earliest opportunity, ideally concurrent with the enforcement petition itself. Respondents must be prepared to contest both proceedings simultaneously and should marshal their Section 48 defences early, as the court may draw an adverse inference from delay in raising objections.

Kerala and Madras High Court Decisions

Complementary rulings from the Kerala and Madras High Courts in the same period have adopted similar reasoning. Early indications suggest these benches have accepted that the “decree gap” analysis is sound, reinforcing the availability of interim measures in India for foreign-seated arbitral awards during the enforcement process. While the specific factual matrices differed, involving infrastructure disputes and cross-border commercial contracts respectively, the courts consistently grounded their analysis in the plain text of Section 9(1) and the structural distinction between Part I and Part II of the Act.

Supreme Court Extract (24 April 2026)

A Supreme Court judgment dated 24 April 2026 addressed the scope of Section 9 in the context of post-award relief. The Court observed that “a literal interpretation of Section 9 of the Act would indicate that the right to seek interim relief is available to any party to the arbitration before or during arbitral proceedings or at any time after the award is delivered but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36 of the Act. ” While the judgment arose from a domestic award context, the reasoning applies with equal, and arguably greater, force to foreign awards, where the “enforced in accordance with Section 36” threshold is structurally incapable of being met until the Section 47–49 process concludes.

Industry observers expect this extract to be cited extensively in pending enforcement proceedings involving foreign-seated arbitral awards in India.

Can Section 9 Run While Enforcement Is Pending?, A Practical Decision Tree

The short answer is yes. But the practical decision of whether to pursue Section 9 relief alongside enforcement, and how to structure both applications, depends on several variables. The decision tree below walks counsel through the critical nodes.

Decision Nodes Explained

• Node 1: Has the enforcement petition been filed? If not, Section 9 is unambiguously available. File a standalone Section 9 application in the competent High Court. If enforcement has been filed, proceed to Node 2.
• Node 2: Has the award been declared enforceable (i.e., deemed a decree under Section 49)? If not, Section 9 remains available per the 2026 HC rulings. File a Section 9 application alongside the pending enforcement proceedings. If the award has already become a decree, Section 9 relief is likely displaced, pursue execution remedies under the Code of Civil Procedure instead.
• Node 3: Is there a real and demonstrable risk of asset dissipation? If yes, Section 9 is not only available but advisable. Prepare evidence of the respondent’s financial conduct, recent asset transfers, or public statements suggesting intent to dissipate. If no immediate risk exists, consider whether Section 9 is tactically necessary or whether enforcement alone will suffice.
• Node 4: Has the respondent raised a Section 9(3) objection (adequate alternative tribunal remedy)? If the arbitral tribunal is still constituted and can grant equivalent interim measures, the court may decline Section 9 jurisdiction under Section 9(3). However, for post-award enforcement proceedings, the tribunal’s mandate has typically expired, weakening this objection considerably.
• Node 5: Are parallel proceedings pending in other jurisdictions? If yes, coordinate the timing and scope of Section 9 relief in India with asset-freezing applications elsewhere. Ensure there is no inconsistency between the interim orders sought.

Example Pleadings Language

For claimants filing a concurrent Section 9 application alongside enforcement, the opening paragraph of the application should establish:

• The existence and finality of the foreign arbitral award, with seat identification and date of delivery.
• That the enforcement petition has been filed (or is being filed simultaneously) under Sections 47–49 of the Act.
• That the award has not yet been declared enforceable and therefore has not attained the status of a decree under Section 49.
• The specific interim measure sought (attachment, injunction, receiver, etc.) and the evidentiary basis for urgency.
• A citation to the Bombay HC ruling and the Supreme Court extract of 24 April 2026 confirming the availability of Section 9 during the enforcement window.

For respondents opposing a Section 9 application, the defence should focus on demonstrating that no real risk of dissipation exists, that the claimant has delayed unreasonably in seeking interim protection, and, where applicable, that Section 9(3) bars the application because an adequate tribunal remedy exists or existed.

Types of Interim Measures Realistically Obtainable in India

Not all interim measures are created equal. Practitioners seeking asset preservation in arbitration in India must match the relief sought to the evidence available and the court’s likely disposition. The following catalogue reflects current judicial practice for interim measures in India.

Asset Preservation, Attachments and Injunctions

Non-Monetary Relief, Discovery and Disclosure

Section 9 also empowers courts to order the preservation of evidence, inspection, and interim custody of goods. In enforcement proceedings for foreign-seated arbitral awards, disclosure orders can be tactically valuable where the award debtor’s asset position in India is opaque. Courts have been willing to order disclosure of bank accounts and shareholding patterns where the applicant establishes a reasonable basis for suspecting that assets may be moved beyond the jurisdiction. However, “fishing expeditions” remain impermissible, the applicant must identify with reasonable specificity the categories of assets and the basis for believing they are at risk.

Enforcement Procedure for Foreign Awards, Step-by-Step Practical Checklist

The process for enforcing foreign arbitral awards in India is a two-stage exercise: first, recognition (Sections 47–48), and then execution as a decree (Section 49). The procedure is governed by Part II of the Act for New York Convention awards. India became a signatory to both the New York Convention, 1958 and the Geneva Convention, 1927, which together facilitate the international enforcement of arbitral awards.

Documents Required, Section 47 Checklist

Section 47(1) of the Act requires the applicant to produce the following documents at the time of filing the enforcement petition:

1. The original award or a duly authenticated copy, authenticated in the manner required by the law of the country in which it was made.
2. The original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy thereof.
3. Where the award or agreement is in a foreign language, a certified translation into English.

In practice, counsel should also prepare and file:

• A statutory affidavit verifying the authenticity of the documents and confirming that the award has not been set aside or suspended at the seat.
• Evidence that the country in which the award was made is a New York Convention signatory (or has been notified under Section 44 by the Indian Government).
• A certified copy of any applicable institutional arbitration rules under which the award was rendered.
• A synopsis of the enforcement-relevant facts and procedural history for the court’s convenience.

Common Defences Under Section 48, And How to Rebut Them

Section 48 of the Act sets out exhaustive grounds on which an Indian court may refuse enforcement of a foreign award. These mirror Article V of the New York Convention and include:

• Incapacity of a party or invalidity of the arbitration agreement (Section 48(1)(a)). Rebut by producing the executed agreement and evidence of each party’s legal capacity at the time of contracting.
• Lack of proper notice or inability to present one’s case (Section 48(1)(b)). Rebut with the complete procedural record, notices served, procedural orders, hearing transcripts, demonstrating full opportunity to participate.
• Award deals with matters beyond the scope of the arbitration agreement (Section 48(1)(c)). Rebut by demonstrating that the claims fell within the scope of the arbitration clause and that the tribunal’s jurisdiction was not challenged or was upheld.
• Composition of the tribunal or procedure not in accordance with the agreement or seat law (Section 48(1)(d)). Rebut with evidence of compliance with the agreed institutional rules and the mandatory procedural law of the seat.
• Award not yet binding, or set aside or suspended at the seat (Section 48(1)(e)). Rebut by confirming that no challenge proceedings are pending (or have been dismissed) at the seat.
• Subject matter not arbitrable under Indian law (Section 48(2)(a)). The scope of non-arbitrability has narrowed considerably in recent years; demonstrate that the dispute concerns commercial rights capable of settlement by arbitration.
• Enforcement contrary to Indian public policy (Section 48(2)(b)). This is the most frequently invoked defence. Indian courts have interpreted “public policy” narrowly following the 2015 amendments, limiting it to fraud, corruption, violation of confidentiality, or conflict with fundamental policy of Indian law. Rebut by demonstrating that none of these narrow grounds are engaged.

Execution and Post-Enforcement, Section 49

Once the court is satisfied that the foreign award is enforceable, Section 49 provides that the award “shall be deemed to be a decree of that court.” At this point, enforcement shifts to execution proceedings under the Code of Civil Procedure. The award-holder may attach movable and immovable property, garnish bank accounts, and pursue other remedies available to decree-holders. The enforcing foreign award checklist below consolidates the full process.

Enforcing foreign award checklist, 10 essential steps:

1. Confirm the award was rendered in a New York Convention signatory state notified under Section 44.
2. Obtain the original award (or authenticated copy) and original arbitration agreement.
3. Prepare certified English translations if required.
4. File the enforcement petition in the competent High Court exercising jurisdiction over the respondent’s assets or place of business.
5. File statutory affidavits under Section 47 together with all supporting documents.
6. If asset dissipation is a risk, file a concurrent Section 9 application for interim relief.
7. Serve notice on the respondent and prepare for Section 48 defences.
8. File rebuttal evidence addressing each Section 48 ground raised.
9. Upon the court declaring the award enforceable, obtain the decree and file execution proceedings.
10. Pursue attachment and execution remedies under the Code of Civil Procedure until the decree is satisfied.

Industry observers expect that in the fast-track commercial divisions of High Courts, the recognition stage (Steps 4–8) can be completed within 12–18 months. Contested enforcement proceedings with multiple Section 48 challenges may extend to 24–36 months. Section 9 applications, by contrast, are typically heard within 2–6 weeks of filing where urgency is demonstrated.

Tactical Coordination, Combining Arbitration, Emergency Arbitrator, Section 9, and Enforcement

The most effective enforcement of foreign awards in India requires counsel to think in parallel tracks rather than sequential steps. The following coordination framework reflects current best practice for arbitration specialists managing cross-border enforcement campaigns.

• Emergency arbitrator (EA) orders. Where the institutional rules permit (ICC, SIAC, LCIA), obtain an EA order for interim preservation at the seat. Use the EA order as evidence of urgency in a subsequent Section 9 application in India, courts view EA orders as persuasive though not directly enforceable under Indian law.
• Section 9 vs Section 17. Section 17 empowers the arbitral tribunal to grant interim measures, but the tribunal’s mandate typically expires upon delivery of the final award. Post-award, Section 9 is the only available route for court-ordered interim protection in India.
• Timing the enforcement petition. Do not delay enforcement while pursuing interim measures. File the enforcement petition under Sections 47–49 as soon as the award is delivered and authenticated. The pendency of enforcement proceedings strengthens the Section 9 application by demonstrating a concrete enforcement pathway.
• Parallel worldwide enforcement. Coordinate Indian enforcement with proceedings in jurisdictions where the respondent holds assets, London, Singapore, Dubai, New York. Ensure that the scope of interim relief sought in India does not conflict with orders obtained elsewhere.
• Evidence preservation. Immediately after the award is delivered, take steps to secure evidence of the respondent’s Indian asset position, corporate filings, property registrations, bank account disclosures (where available). This evidence will be critical in both the Section 9 application and execution proceedings.

Model Pleadings and Checklists

The model language below is intended as a starting framework. Counsel should adapt each template to the specific facts, jurisdiction, and institutional rules applicable to their dispute.

(a) Section 9 application, award exists, enforcement not yet filed:

“The Applicant respectfully submits this application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking [specify interim measure]. A foreign arbitral award dated [date] was rendered in favour of the Applicant in proceedings seated in [city/country] under the [institutional rules]. The award has not been the subject of any setting-aside application at the seat. No enforcement petition has yet been filed in India. The Applicant apprehends that the Respondent is likely to [dissipate assets / transfer property / remove funds from the jurisdiction], as evidenced by [specify evidence]. Accordingly, the Applicant seeks [specific relief] to preserve the subject matter of the award pending enforcement.”

(b) Combined Section 9 + enforcement petition:

“Simultaneously with this enforcement petition filed under Sections 47–49 of the Act, the Applicant seeks interim protection under Section 9. The award has not yet been declared enforceable and does not constitute a decree. The Applicant relies upon [Bombay HC ruling / Supreme Court extract dated 24 April 2026] for the proposition that Section 9 relief remains available until the award is enforced and deemed a decree under Section 49.”

(c) Defence to a Section 9 application after enforcement filed:

“The Respondent submits that the Applicant’s Section 9 application is misconceived and ought to be dismissed. The Applicant has failed to demonstrate any real risk of asset dissipation; the evidence relied upon is speculative and outdated. Further, the arbitral tribunal remains available to grant equivalent relief under Section 17 / the institutional rules [if applicable]. In the alternative, Section 9(3) of the Act bars the application where an efficacious remedy is available before the tribunal.”

Master checklist, 10 items for counsel:

1. Identify competent High Court (based on respondent’s assets, place of business, or cause of action).
2. Authenticate award documents per Section 47 requirements.
3. Obtain certified translations if needed.
4. Assess asset dissipation risk and prepare supporting evidence.
5. Decide whether to file standalone Section 9 or combined Section 9 + enforcement.
6. Prepare statutory affidavit and supporting annexures.
7. Anticipate and pre-empt Section 48 defences in enforcement petition.
8. Brief counsel on Section 9(3) objections and prepare rebuttal.
9. Coordinate with counsel in seat jurisdiction and other enforcement jurisdictions.
10. Diarise key timelines: Section 9 hearing (2–6 weeks), enforcement adjudication (12–36 months), decree conversion and execution.

Conclusion

The 2026 case law has resolved a question that lingered for years at the margins of Indian enforcement practice: interim relief under Section 9 remains a live tool throughout the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in India. Parties holding foreign awards should act swiftly, filing enforcement petitions without delay, pursuing concurrent Section 9 applications where asset preservation is at stake, and coordinating Indian proceedings with parallel enforcement efforts in other jurisdictions. The practical checklists and model pleadings in this guide are designed to be adapted and deployed immediately.

For parties on the receiving end of enforcement proceedings, the strategic imperative is equally clear: engage early, marshal Section 48 defences promptly, and be prepared to contest Section 9 applications on the facts. In either position, the quality of preparation in the first weeks after an award is rendered will determine the outcome of proceedings that may take years to conclude.

Sources

1. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Government of India / IndiaCode
2. New York Convention (1958), UNCITRAL
3. Supreme Court Judgment Extract (24 April 2026)
4. LiveLawBiz, Bombay High Court Coverage
5. Nishith Desai Associates, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Research Paper
6. Lexology, Enforcement of Foreign Awards in India: Effective Strategies
7. AZB Partners, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and FEMA
8. SCC Online, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in India: Analysis
9. National Judicial Academy, Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards
10. IBA, The Enforceability of Interim Orders Under Indian Law