M/s Excel Generators Pvt. Ltd. v.

IJM Corporation Berhad (Delhi)

Where a contract is terminable contract and it can be foreclosed, the interim relief under Section
9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot be granted for specific performance of the
contract. In all those cases where monetary damages can compensate the breach of contract, the
Court cannot insist upon the parties that the contract should be specifically performed.
C.V. Rao & ors. v. Strategic port investments kpc ltd. & ors(Delhi)
The scope of relief under Section 9 therefore, cannot be extended to directing specific
performance of the contract itself, though the Court must have due regard to the underlying
purpose of the conferment of the power upon the Court i.e. to promote the efficacy of arbitration
as a form of dispute resolution.
Nepa Limited Vs. Manoj Kumar Agrawal (M.P)
when moved under Section 9 of the Act for interim protection, the provisions of the Specific
Relief Act cannot be made applicable since in taking interim measures under Section 9 of the
Act, the court does not decide on the merits of the case or the rights of parties and considers only
the question of existence of an arbitration Clause and the necessity of taking interim measures
for issuing necessary directions or orders.
KSL & Industries Ltd v. National textiles corporation ltd (Delhi)
Section 9 of the act shall not apply to the contract which is otherwise determinable in respect of
which the prayer is made specifically to enforce the same.
Dirk India Pvt Ltd (Mumbai)
Application under Section 9 if allowed , would result in the grant of interim specific performance
,interference by the court will negate the sanctity and efficacy of the arbitration as a form of
alternate dispute.