Interim attachment in arbitration may be guided by Order 38 Rule 5 principles, without vitiating the Section 9 decision.

Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act permits interim attachment in aid of arbitration, and the procedural principles of Order 38 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure may guide that discretion even though the Code is not bodily incorporated into the Act. The Court held that the decisive inquiry is whether the facts justify attachment on grounds of justice and discretion. A reference to Order 38 Rule 5 does not, by itself, vitiate the order refusing attachment. The refusal to grant attachment was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order refusing attachment under Section 9(ii)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act was infirm because the principles of Order 38 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure were taken into account.

Analysis: The appeal concerned an interim request for attachment in aid of arbitration. The Court held that although the Code of Civil Procedure is not bodily incorporated into the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, its procedural principles may guide the exercise of power under Section 9. The relevant inquiry remains whether the facts justify the grant of attachment as a matter of justice and discretion. The impugned order did not suffer from any legal infirmity merely because it referred to Order 38 Rule 5 while deciding whether attachment should be granted.

Conclusion: The refusal to grant attachment was upheld and the appeal failed.

---