THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C. KUMARAPPAN. *Court Observation:* The court is considering appeals against an order dated 30.10.2025, where a learned Single Judge dismissed applications under Section 9 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim relief. The Single Judge held that Section 9 applications are not maintainable during the pendency of Execution Proceedings before a competent Civil Court. The appellants argue that Section 9 applications are maintainable even after an arbitral award is passed and before its enforcement under Section 36 of the Act.

[06/12, 09:34] Meta AI: The Madras High Court judgment you’re referring to involves appeals against an order dated 30.10.2025 passed by a learned Single Judge in Original Application Nos. 997 and 998 of 2025 and Arbitration Application No. 1374 of 2025. The appeals, OSA(CAD) Nos. 118, 119, 135 & 136 of 2025, were heard by a Division Bench comprising THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C. KUMARAPPAN.

The core issue revolves around the maintainability of an application under Section 9 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim relief, when an Execution Petition is already pending before a competent Civil Court. The learned Single Judge dismissed the applications, citing that Section 9 application is not maintainable during the pendency of Execution Proceedings, and liberty was granted to approach the Execution Court for interim relief or enforcement of the arbitral award.

The appellant’s counsel argues that the scope of Section 9 shouldn’t be restricted and that it allows for interim measures even after an arbitral award is passed and before its enforcement under Section 36 of the Act.
[06/12, 09:35] Meta AI: *Madras High Court*

– *Case No.:* OSA(CAD) Nos.118, 119, 135 & 136 of 2025
– *Judge:* HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND MR JUSTICE C. KUMARAPPAN
– *Parties:*
– Appellant: Eros International Media Limited
– Respondent: 14 Reels Entertainment Private Limited and 14 Reels Plus LLP
– *Date of Order:* 03.12.2025
– *Counsel:*
– For Appellant: Mr. Ar.L.Sundaresan, Mr. P.S.Raman, and Mr. Nithyaesh Natraj, Senior Counsels
– For Respondent: Mr. M.S.Krishnan and Mr. Vijay Narayan, Senior Counsels
– *Court Observation:* The court is considering appeals against an order dated 30.10.2025, where a learned Single Judge dismissed applications under Section 9 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim relief. The Single Judge held that Section 9 applications are not maintainable during the pendency of Execution Proceedings before a competent Civil Court. The appellants argue that Section 9 applications are maintainable even after an arbitral award is passed and before its enforcement under Section 36 of the Act.