In Brief
A sole arbitrator passed interim orders restraining the respondent from disposing of certain flats. When the respondent allegedly breached this order, the arbitrator referred the contempt matter to the High Court under Section 27(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The High Court held that Section 27(5) does not empower the tribunal to seek contempt action for violations of interim orders except those relating to evidence. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that Section 27(5)'s plain language covers any contempt to the tribunal during proceedings, including breach of interim orders. For interim orders to have practical effect, they must be enforceable; otherwise, parties' choice to seek relief from the tribunal instead of the court would be meaningless. The appeal was allowed and the case remanded for factual determination of contempt.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.