Interim relief in credit-information disputes depends on maintainability and necessary-party objections, which require fresh judicial consideration.

Section 9 interim relief may be sought in aid of arbitral proceedings, but in a credit-information dispute linked to Section 21 of the Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act, the maintainability objection and the absence of lending institutions as parties had not been properly considered. The matter concerned correction or updating of credit information through the statutory mechanism under that Act, yet the appellate court noted that the relevant objections were not addressed by the learned Single Judge. Those questions were therefore remitted for fresh decision after hearing both sides.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was maintainable in the circumstances, whether the lending institutions were necessary parties, and whether the matter required reconsideration by the learned Single Judge.

Analysis: The information dispute arose in relation to credit data maintained under Section 21 of the Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act, 2005, which provides a mechanism for correction or updating of credit information and contemplates appropriate steps by the credit institution and related authorities. The interim relief sought was linked to an alleged dispute over dissemination of credit information, and the Court noted that Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 permits interim protection in aid of arbitral proceedings. However, the order under appeal did not contain any discussion on the appellant's objections regarding maintainability or the absence of lending institutions as parties, and those questions had not been properly addressed by the learned Single Judge.

Conclusion: The issue was left open for fresh decision by the learned Single Judge after hearing both sides, and the appeal was disposed of by remitting those questions for determination.

---