Mere Allegations of Harassment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Wife in Matrimonial Suicide Case 'Convenience Of Wife Not A Thumb Rule, But Custody Of Minor Child Is A Weighing Aspect': Punjab & Haryana HC Transfers Divorce Case To Rohtak MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Cooperative Society Is A “Veritable Party” To Arbitration Clause In Flat Agreements, Temple Trust Entitled To Arbitrate As Non-Signatory: Bombay High Court State Government Cannot Review Its Own Revisional Orders Under Section 41(3): Allahabad High Court Affirms Legal Bar on Successive Reviews When Several Issues Arise, Courts Must Answer Each With Reasons: Supreme Court Automatic Retention Trumps Lessee Tag: Calcutta High Court Declares Saregama India ‘Raiyat’, Directs Reconsideration of Land Conversion Application Recovery of Valid Ticket Raises Presumption of Bona Fide Travel – Burden Shifts to Railways: Delhi High Court Restores Railway Accident Claim Failure to Frame Issue on Limitation Vitiates Award of Compensation Under Telegraph Act: Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Order, Remands Matter Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Heritable Right: Gujarat High Court Rejects 9-Year Delayed Claim, Orders Re-Issuance of ₹4 Lakh Compensation Court Cannot Rewrite Contracts to Suit Contractor’s Convenience: Kerala High Court Upholds Termination of Road Work Under Risk and Cost Clause Post-Bail Conduct Is Irrelevant in Appeal Against Grant of Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Crucial Distinction Between Appeal and Cancellation Granting Anticipatory Bail to a Long-Absconding Accused Makes a Mockery of the Judicial Process: Supreme Court Cracks Down on Pre-Arrest Bail in Murder Case Recognition as an Intangible Asset Does Not Confer Ownership: Supreme Court Draws a Sharp Line Between Accounting Entries and Property Rights IBC Cannot Be the Guiding Principle for Restructuring the Ownership and Control of Spectrum: Supreme Court Reasserts Public Trust Over Natural Resources Courts Cannot Convict First and Search for Law Later: Supreme Court Faults Prosecution for Ignoring Statutory Foundation in Cement Case When the Law Itself Stood Withdrawn, How Could Its Violation Survive?: Supreme Court Quashes 1994 Cement Conviction Under E.C. Act Ten Years Means Ten Years – Not a Day Less: Supreme Court Refuses to Dilute Statutory Experience Requirement for SET Exemption SET in Malayalam Cannot Qualify You to Teach Economics: Supreme Court Upholds Subject-Specific Eligibility for HSST Appointments Outsourcing Cannot Become A Tool To Defeat Regularization: Supreme Court On Perennial Nature Of Government Work Once Similarly Placed Workers Were Regularized, Denial to Others Is Discrimination: Supreme Court Directs Regularization of Income Tax Daily-Wage Workers Right To Form Association Is Protected — But Not A Right To Run It Free From Regulation: Supreme Court Recalibrates Article 19 In Sports Governance S. Nithya Cannot Be Transplanted Into Cricket: Supreme Court Shields District Cricket Bodies From Judicially Imposed Structural Overhaul Will | Propounder Must Dispel Every Suspicious Circumstance — Failure Is Fatal: : Punjab & Haryana High Court Electronic Evidence Authenticity Jeopardized by Unexplained Delay and Procedural Omissions: MP High Court Rejects Belated 65B Application Not Answering to the Questions of the IO Would Not Ipso Facto Mean There Is Non-Cooperation: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Undertaking to Satisfy Award Is Not Waiver of Appeal: Supreme Court Restores Insurer’s Statutory Right

Protection of Award Amount Paramount: Delhi HC Directs Reliance Infrastructure to Secure Assets Worth US$ 135 Million in Shanghai Electric Arbitration Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Delhi, in the landmark case of Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd. Versus Reliance Infrastructure Ltd., has upheld the enforceability of interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the context of foreign arbitral awards. The Court ordered Reliance Infrastructure to refrain from alienating assets up to US$ 135,320,728.42 to ensure the enforceability of a Singapore International Arbitration Centre award. The decision, delivered by Justices Sanjeev Sachdeva and Manoj Jain on 6th March 2024, also dismissed cross objections raised by Reliance Infrastructure regarding jurisdiction and the applicability of Section 9 of the Act.

Legal Point: The key legal issue addressed was the grant of interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for foreign arbitral awards and the jurisdiction of Indian courts in such matters.

Facts and Issues: The case involved a dispute over equipment supply and service contracts for the Sasan UMPP, with Shanghai Electric alleging unpaid dues of approximately INR 1100 Crores by Reliance Infrastructure. Following an arbitration process under the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, which resulted in an award favoring Shanghai Electric, the appellant sought interim reliefs in India to secure the award amount, apprehending non-compliance by Reliance Infrastructure.

Jurisdiction and Interim Measures: The Court confirmed its jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act based on the location of assets in Delhi. It emphasized the necessity of interim measures to preserve assets for enforcing foreign arbitral awards.

Financial Condition of Respondent: Observations were made on Reliance Infrastructure’s financial health and previous assurances to the court, which led to the necessity of granting interim measures.

Dismissal of Cross Objections: Reliance Infrastructure’s objections on jurisdiction and Section 9 applicability were dismissed, affirming the court’s stance on its authority to grant interim measures in cases of international arbitration.

Decision: The High Court ordered Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. To refrain from selling, alienating, transferring, or encumbering assets amounting to US$ 135,320,728.42. This decision aims to preserve the enforceability of the foreign arbitral award, subject to any existing charges on the assets.

Date of Decision: 06th March 2024

Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd. Versus Reliance Infrastructure Ltd.

Latest Legal News