https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767247 Delhi HC dismissed appeal under Section 37(2) of Arbitration Act challenging interim injunction restraining appellants from alienating shareholding pending arbitration. Court applied principle of least intervention, holding that appellate court should not interfere with arbitral tribunal's discretionary order unless exercised arbitrarily or perversely. Share Purchase Agreement was not contingent contract as claimed by appellants, who alleged breach by respondent. Tribunal's order preventing third-party sale of shares pending dispute adjudication was justified to preserve subject matter. Respondent demonstrated readiness to perform agreement, supporting interim relief grant. en-us Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:35:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767247 Delhi HC dismissed appeal under Section 37(2) of Arbitration Act challenging interim injunction restraining appellants from alienating shareholding pending arbitration. Court applied principle of least intervention, holding that appellate court should not interfere with arbitral tribunal's discretionary order unless exercised arbitrarily or perversely. Share Purchase Agreement was not contingent contract as claimed by appellants, who alleged breach by respondent. Tribunal's order preventing third-party sale of shares pending dispute adjudication was justified to preserve subject matter. Respondent demonstrated readiness to perform agreement, supporting interim relief grant. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767247