Foreign arbitral award enforcement survives later vacation of an anti-arbitration injunction and related objections fail.

A foreign arbitral award made while an interim anti-arbitration injunction was in force was held not to be unenforceable once that injunction was later vacated. The court treated such an injunction as an exceptional equitable remedy, and the later final vacation of the injunction was taken to relate back, extinguishing the only objection founded on its subsistence. Separate objections under Section 48 were not properly established before the court of first instance and could not be newly expanded at the enforcement stage. Enforcement refusal was therefore set aside and the award was allowed to proceed toward enforcement.

---

---

Issues: Whether a foreign arbitral award, made while an anti-arbitration injunction was in force against the award-holder, could be refused enforcement in India after that injunction was later vacated.

Analysis: The right to grant an anti-arbitration injunction in personam was accepted, but only as an exceptional equitable remedy to be exercised with caution and in aid of justice, comity, and restraint. An interim injunction that is subsequently vacated on final adjudication ordinarily stands obliterated and relates back to the date of the application. Where enforcement of a foreign award is resisted solely on the footing that it was obtained during the subsistence of such an interim injunction, the enforcing court must test that objection in light of the final status of the injunction. Once the injunction is finally vacated, the sole ground that the award was made during its subsistence ceases to survive. The remaining objections under Section 48 were not properly established before the court of first instance and, in any event, could not be newly amplified at the enforcement stage when they had not been effectively pursued in the appropriate forum.

Conclusion: The foreign award was not rendered unenforceable merely because it was made while the interim injunction was in force. After the injunction was vacated, enforcement could not be denied on that ground, and the objection to enforcement failed.

Final Conclusion: The enforcement refusal was set aside and the matter was left to proceed toward enforcement of the foreign award in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: An award obtained during the currency of an interim anti-arbitration injunction is not barred from enforcement once that injunction is finally vacated, because the later vacation relates back and removes the sole enforcement objection founded on the subsisting injunction.

---