Delhi HC hears petition to restrain invocation of bank guarantees under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 24 October 2026

Case: Enerica Infra 3 Private Limited vs NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited & Anr
Court: High Court of Delhi
Bench: TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
Decided: 14 October 2026
Statutes: Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s.9
Source: Indian Kanoon (Delhi HC)

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In Enerica Infra 3 Private Limited vs NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited & Anr, the Delhi High Court on 2026-10-14 heard a petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner sought to restrain the respondents from invoking or encashing Performance Bank Guarantees, Viability Gap Funding Bank Guarantees, and Connectivity Bank Guarantees, and sought their release and return.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

The excerpt does not provide the court's reasoning or a legal principle applied, only the nature of the petition filed.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates should note that Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is the appropriate provision for seeking interim measures, such as restraining the invocation of bank guarantees, before or during arbitral proceedings. Litigants seeking such relief must clearly identify the specific bank guarantees and the amounts involved.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 allows for interim measures by courts.
2Petitions under Section 9 can seek to restrain the invocation or encashment of bank guarantees.
3The petition also sought directions for the release and return of the bank guarantees.

The Legal Issue The petitioner, Enerica Infra 3 Private Limited, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before the Delhi High Court. The core issue was to restrain the respondent nos. 1 and 2, NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited (NVVN) and Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Limited (UPPTCL), from invoking, encashing, or appropriating various bank guarantees. These included a Performance Bank Guarantee for Rs. 27,96,25,000/-, a Viability Gap Funding Bank Guarantee for Rs. 13,50,00,000/-, and Connectivity Bank Guarantees totaling Rs. 10,74,00,000/-. Additionally, the petitioner sought directions for the release and return of these bank guarantees.

Court's Reasoning The provided excerpt only details the filing of the petition and the relief sought by the petitioner. It does not contain any reasoning or decision by the Delhi High Court regarding the merits of the petition or the application of Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court's deliberation on the arguments presented by the parties and its eventual ruling are not available in this text.

What Follows The excerpt does not specify any immediate directions or consequences from the court's hearing on 2026-10-14. The matter would proceed with further hearings where the court would consider the arguments of both sides regarding the interim relief sought under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before making a determination on whether to grant the injunction or order the release of the bank guarantees.