How to draft an application under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 using AI

In this article, I will show you exactly how I learned to use AI to draft a section 17 application that actually works. Whether you are a junior lawyer who just got handed their first urgent arbitration matter or you are a seasoned lawyer tired of recreating the application every time emergency strikes, these techniques will change how you handle the most stressful applications in arbitration practice.

Introduction

Have you ever had one of those moments where you think you understand something, only to realize you have barely scratched the surface?

That is exactly what happened to me on a Saturday when I received a WhatsApp message that completely changed my view of arbitration law.

I was enjoying my weekend coffee with my mom when my senior sent me a voice note:

“Call me urgently”.

One of the client’s business partners is liquidating assets while arbitration is ongoing. We need to move fast. Can you research on section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act? This is different from the section 9 we usually do.”

My first thought was, “Wait, what is section 17?”

I had spent months learning about section 9, how to approach courts for interim relief in arbitration matters. I thought I knew arbitration inside out.

But section 17? This was a new territory, and my seniors’ urgency suggested this was something big.

That weekend turned into an intensive crash course in what I now consider one of the most elegant provisions in Indian arbitration law. But more importantly, it introduced me to a completely new way of thinking about legal drafting in the age of AI.

I have written an article on how to obtain interim reliefs u/s 9 of arbitration and conciliation act, you can read that to know more about section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Let me take you through that journey of discovery.

Why does section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 even exist?

After spending the weekend diving deep into section 17, I could not wait to discuss my findings with my senior on Monday.

“So,” my senior said, while settling into her chair, “tell me what you discovered about section 17.”

I was excited to share what I had learnt.

I shared that, while section 9 requires us to run to court every time we need an interim relief, section 17 lets the arbitral tribunal itself protect the parties during the arbitration process. It is like giving arbitrators similar emergency powers that judges have.”

She smiled. “Good. But why do you think this matters?”

That is when I realised the deeper significance.

“Because arbitration is supposed to be autonomous, right? If parties have to keep running to court for every urgent issue, it defeats the whole purpose of choosing arbitration over litigation.”

“Exactly!” she said. “Section 17 is what makes arbitration truly self-sufficient. But there is a catch, the timing.”

When can you file a section 17 application?

My senior explained something crucial that the textbooks do not often mention.

“Unlike section 9, which you can use before, during, or after arbitration,” she said, “section 17 has a very specific window. It only works while the arbitral proceedings are going on.”

This hit me. “So if the tribunal has not been constituted yet, or if they have already passed their final award, section 17 cannot help?”

“Precisely. That is what makes section 17 applications so time-sensitive. You have to act while the arbitration proceedings are going on, and you have to act fast.”

She pulled out the client’s case file. “That’s exactly why our situation is so urgent. The tribunal is constituted, and arbitration is ongoing, but our client’s business partner is destroying the value of their joint venture. Every day we delay, more assets disappear.”

This is when I understood the importance of section 17

How has section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996, evolved over time?

“Let me tell you something fascinating,” my senior continued. “Section 17 did not always have the power it has today.”

She explained that when the Arbitration Act was first enacted in 1996, section 17 was more of a suggestion than a command.

Arbitral tribunals could pass interim orders, but these orders were practically unenforceable.

“Imagine telling someone to stop doing something harmful, but having no way to actually make them stop,” she said. “That is what section 17 was like initially.”

The breakthrough came with the 2015 amendment, which substituted the old provision and added section 17(2). This made the tribunal orders to be enforced as an order of a court, under the Civil Procedure Code,1908

“Suddenly,” she explained, “ignoring a tribunal’s interim order became as risky as defying a court order. Parties could face contempt proceedings and execution actions.”

But there was another important change in 2019 that many lawyers overlook.

“The 2019 amendment clarified that tribunals cannot grant interim relief after passing their final award. This actually strengthened section 17 by creating clear boundaries.

What powers are vested with the arbitrators under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996?

As we prepared to work on our client’s application, my senior walked me through the specific powers that section 17 grants to arbitral tribunals.

“Think of it as giving arbitrators a complete emergency response kit,” she said.

The following are the powers vested with the arbitrators under section 17:

Asset protection powers: Tribunals can preserve goods, ensure interim custody, or even order the sale of perishable items. In our case, this meant we could prevent the business partner from liquidating valuable inventory or equipment.

Property security powers: They can authorise detention, preservation, or inspection of any property that’s central to the dispute. This was crucial for our client because the partner was trying to hide assets and deny access to the business premises.

Injunctive powers: Just like courts, tribunals can restrain parties from specific actions or appoint receivers to manage disputed property. We needed this to stop the ongoing asset stripping.

Financial security powers: They can order parties to deposit disputed amounts in neutral accounts or provide security for claims.

Flexible relief powers: The catch-all provision allows tribunals to grant any other relief they think is “just and convenient.”

“That last power,” my senior emphasised, “is what makes section 17 so powerful. It lets tribunals be creative and craft solutions that perfectly fit the specific problem.”

How has AI evolved in drafting a section 17 application?

This is where my story takes an unexpected turn that completely transformed my approach to legal drafting.

As I sat down to draft our section 17 application, I was feeling overwhelmed by the complexity of facts, the urgency of the situation, and the need to get everything perfect on the first try.

That is when my senior suggested something that seemed almost revolutionary at the time: “Why don’t you try using AI to help structure your thinking and drafting process?”

I was hesitant. “Won’t that make the application generic and unconvincing?”

She laughed. “That’s the mistake most lawyers make with AI. They think it’s about replacing human thinking. Actually, it’s about amplifying human thinking. She taught me how to go about it, and I was amazed, so I have decided to teach you all the step-by-step approach that my senior taught me.

Are you ready? Let us begin.

Step 1: Create a structure

Most lawyers think AI is like Google; you ask, and it gives.

But that is exactly why their drafts do not work.

Think about it.

If a junior associate walked into your office and you said, ‘Draft me a section 17 application,’ what would happen?”

They would ask a bunch of questions about the case

They need to know the parties, the dispute, the urgency, and the documents.

But somehow, when we use AI, we expect it to magically know our case details.

We need to train ChatGPT to think like a junior associate. Therefore, I give a specific prompt to ChatGPT:

“I need to file an application under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before an Arbitral Tribunal. The tribunal has already been constituted. Please ask me all the relevant questions you need to draft a complete and persuasive section 17 application. The application must include factual background, details of the JV or contract, acts of misconduct by the respondent, reference to arbitration proceedings already initiated, and the precise reliefs that can be sought under section 17.”

This is the response of ChatGPT:

“Certainly. To draft a Section 17 application for interim relief, I would need the following details:

Details of the parties – Full names, roles (Claimant/Respondent), and nature of relationship (e.g., business partners, JV members, etc.).
Nature of the dispute – What is the dispute about? When did it arise? Is it commercial, contractual, property-related, etc.?
Existence of arbitration – Has arbitration commenced? Has the Statement of Claim been filed? Who are the arbitrators?
Jurisdiction – Has any Section 9 petition been previously filed before a civil court? If so, what was the outcome?
Facts constituting urgency or threat – What acts of the Respondent are prompting this application? (e.g., disposal of property, misappropriation, denial of access, destruction of records).
Documents available – Are there JV agreements, sale deeds, invoices, bank statements, or other proof?
Interim relief sought – What specific reliefs do you want from the Tribunal (injunction, deposit of funds, status quo, etc.)?
Legal basis – Any relevant statutory clauses or contractual provisions you want to rely on?
Whether ad-interim reliefs are also needed – Should the tribunal grant temporary protection pending full hearing?

Once you provide these, I can proceed to prepare the draft application.”

So, before even asking ChatGPT to draft anything, I made it ask the right questions.

Why?

Because otherwise, you get a one-size-fits-all pleading that does not reflect your case.

Step 2: Feeding facts to ChatGPT the right way

Once ChatGPT gave me its list of questions, I did not just dump everything I knew into one long paragraph.

I structured my facts as if I were briefing a senior.

This not only helps AI stay focused, but it also helps you think better.

So I gave the following prompt to ChatGPT:

“Please find below the relevant facts for drafting a Section 17 application. Kindly confirm if anything is missing before proceeding with the draft.

Parties:

Applicant: Mr. Karan Desai (Claimant in arbitration)
Respondent: Mr. Raghav Mehta (Respondent)
They are first cousins and business partners in a JV firm.

JV Details:

The JV is called “Aurum Heights Partnership”, formed under a registered Deed of Partnership dated 12 March 2012 (Exhibit A).
The firm was created for the construction and development of a residential housing project in Lonavala.
The land was jointly purchased and registered in the firm’s name. The total project was for 64 flats.

Dispute:

In 2017, disputes arose when the Applicant discovered that the Respondent had executed private sale agreements for 14 flats (Exhibit B), without disclosing sale proceeds.
Respondent opened a separate account in the name of the JV in a different bank and deposited those proceeds secretly (Exhibit C).
Thereafter, the Respondent also unilaterally claimed to remove the Applicant as a partner via a sham amendment to the deed (Exhibit D).
On confronting, the Respondent threatened the Applicant and denied all access to firm documents, site, and accounts.
There are 37 flats still unsold.

Arbitration Proceedings:

The matter is already before a sole arbitrator, and it is a domestic arbitration..
A Statement of Claim has been filed by the Applicant.
Respondent is in the process of filing a reply.

Previous Legal Proceedings:

The Applicant had earlier filed Section 9 proceedings before the District Court in Pune in 2021, seeking status quo.
The Court granted interim protection, but the Section 9 petition was disposed of after the constitution of the Tribunal.

Urgency and Misconduct:

The Applicant has credible information that the Respondent is in the process of selling more flats at undervalued rates.
There is also a fresh Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2024 (Exhibit E) indicating third-party interest being created in 10 of the unsold flats.
There is a risk of irreparable loss unless interim relief is granted.

Reliefs Sought:

Injunction restraining the Respondent from selling, transferring, or creating third-party rights in the remaining 37 flats.
Directions to deposit the proceeds of the earlier 14 flats (₹2.89 crore) into a no-lien account.
Directions to disclose and deposit any proceeds from unauthorized MoUs or flat bookings.
Directions to submit the bank account statements of both JV accounts.
Ad-interim protection pending final decision.
Costs.”

Why does this prompt work?

This gives GPT a map to write from. You are no longer asking it to “fill in blanks.” You are making it walk the same path you have already seen.

Based on the prompt, ChatGPT gave the following response:

“Thank you for the detailed and structured information. Based on the facts provided, I now have sufficient material to begin drafting the Section 17 application. I will start by drafting the body of the application in continuous numbered paragraphs, beginning with “The Applicant Most Respectfully Submits as Under.”

Would you like me to proceed with drafting paragraphs 1–20 now?”

STEP 3: Draft the body of the Section 17 application

Now that the factual story is ready, it is tempting to say:

“Hey ChatGPT, draft the whole section 17 application for me.”

But that is a rookie move.

If you do that, ChatGPT will give you:

A generic template
Paragraphs with no flow or emphasis
And references to documents that may not even exist

So here is what I did instead and what I recommend you do:

Step 3A: Start with the foundation

The tribunal needs to know:

Who are these parties?
Why were they in business together?
What property or rights are at stake?

You are building the base of the pleading. To achieve this, I give the following prompt:

“Let’s begin by drafting only the opening paragraphs (1 to 4) of the Section 17 application.
Start with: “The Applicant Most Respectfully Submits as Under:”

These paragraphs should set up the JV story and answer:

Who are the parties and how are they related?
When was the partnership formed?
What was the purpose of the JV?
Where is the property located and who owns it?
What was agreed about profit sharing?

Mention the Partnership Deed as Exhibit A, but do not assume its contents, just state what I tell you:

Date: 12 March 2012
JV Name: Aurum Heights Partnership
Project: 64 flats in Lonavala
Profit/loss to be shared equally.”

Based on the prompt given, ChatGPT generates the following result:

“The Applicant Most Respectfully Submits as Under:

The Applicant and the Respondent are first cousins and long-standing business associates who jointly engaged in a real estate venture through a partnership arrangement.
On 12 March 2012, the Applicant and the Respondent executed a registered Deed of Partnership under the name and style of “Aurum Heights Partnership” for the purpose of acquiring land and undertaking a residential development project. A true copy of the Partnership Deed is annexed and marked as Exhibit A.
The parties jointly acquired a plot of land in Lonavala, Maharashtra, where they commenced construction of a residential housing project consisting of 64 flats. The land was registered in the name of the partnership firm.
As per the terms of the partnership, all profits and losses were to be equally shared, and both parties were to participate in the management of the project on equal footing.”

Step 3B: Mention the issue

This is the “cause of action” zone, wherein you talk about what went wrong and why you’re before the Tribunal.

You now teach ChatGPT to narrate:

What misconduct occurred?
When did it start?
How did the Respondent violate the partnership?
What did the Applicant find out, and what did he do?

Therefore, I give the following prompt:

“Let’s now move to paragraphs 5 to 10 of the application. These should narrate the misconduct:

In 2017, Respondent sold 14 flats behind Applicant’s back for a total consideration of ₹2,89,00,000/-.
Proceeds were deposited into a secret JV bank account
In 2018, Respondent fabricated an amendment to the partnership deed, removing Applicant
Since then, Applicant has been denied access to records, finances, and the site

Reference documents are as follows:

Sale agreements = Exhibit B
Secret bank account statements = Exhibit C
Forged amendment = Exhibit D

Do not mention anything beyond this, just build the sequence based on these facts.”

You can see the result that ChatGPT has generated for me:

“In or around early 2017, the Applicant discovered that the Respondent had unilaterally executed private sale agreements for 14 flats in the joint venture project, without the knowledge or consent of the Applicant.
The Applicant has obtained copies of 14 sale agreements executed by the Respondent without consent, which cumulatively reveal a total consideration of approximately ₹2,89,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Eighty-Nine Lakh only). These proceeds were diverted to a separate account operated solely by the Respondent. Copies of the said sale agreements and bank records are annexed and marked as Exhibits B and C, respectively.
In 2018, the Respondent purported to unilaterally remove the Applicant from the partnership by executing a forged and unregistered amendment to the Partnership Deed. A copy of the said forged amendment is annexed and marked as Exhibit D.
The Applicant confronted the Respondent, but was denied any explanation and was thereafter excluded from all operational, financial, and managerial affairs of the project.
The Applicant has since been prevented from accessing the project site, financial accounts, and sales documentation, despite repeated oral and written requests.
The acts of the Respondent constitute a fundamental breach of the fiduciary duties owed by a partner and a calculated attempt to wrongfully appropriate joint venture assets to the exclusion of the Applicant.”

Step 3C: Mentioning urgency and arbitration Details

So now GPT must:

Show that arbitration is underway
Show that prior Section 9 protection ended
Build urgency for the Tribunal to act now
Show risk of irreparable harm

So I give the following prompt to ChatGPT:

“Now draft paragraphs 11 to 20 of the application, focusing on:

Section 9 petition was filed in Hon’ble District Court at Pune in 2021, interim relief granted, then disposed of after the tribunal was formed
Arbitration is ongoing before a sole arbitrator; Statement of Claim filed
In February 2024, Applicant discovered the MoU signed by Respondent to sell 10 more flats (Exhibit E)
Respondent continues to deny access to books, bank accounts, and sales records
There is a real threat that more flats will be sold, frustrating the arbitration
Emphasise urgency and risk of irreparable injury.”

You can see how ChatGPT has generated the following result for me:

“In 2021, the Applicant filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before the Hon’ble District Court at Pune, seeking interim protection against unauthorized dealings by the Respondent.
The Court granted temporary relief, restraining further sale of flats. However, upon the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, the said petition was disposed of.
A sole arbitrator was appointed by mutual consent, and arbitral proceedings have since commenced.
The Applicant has filed the Statement of Claim. The Respondent is yet to file a Statement of Defence.
In February 2024, the Applicant obtained a copy of a Memorandum of Understanding executed by the Respondent, purporting to create third-party rights in 10 unsold flats. A copy of the said MoU is annexed and marked as Exhibit E.
The Respondent has once again failed to disclose these transactions or seek the consent of the Applicant.
The Applicant continues to be denied access to books of accounts, sales registers, partnership correspondence, and bank accounts.
These actions show a consistent pattern of concealment and unilateral appropriation of joint assets.
The Applicant has a genuine apprehension that the Respondent will continue disposing of joint venture assets, thereby rendering the outcome of the arbitration infructuous.
It is therefore necessary that this Hon’ble Tribunal protect the subject matter of the dispute by granting interim relief.”

Step 4: Drafting the prayer clause

This is where most juniors go wrong. They say:

“Draft the prayer clause.”

And ChatGPT obliges with a copy-paste string of reliefs that do not match the pleadings.

But you know better. The prayer clause is not a wishlist. It is a precise ask based on:

Facts established in paras 1–20
Reliefs that the arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to grant under section 17
A balance between preserving property and procedural fairness

So here is how we do it properly. My prompt is as follows:

“Now draft paragraph 21 onward of the section 17 application, the prayer clause.
Begin with:

“In the circumstances aforesaid, the Applicant prays that this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to:”

The following reliefs must be included:

a) Injunction restraining the Respondent from selling or creating third-party rights in the remaining 37 flats.
b) Direction to deposit ₹2.89 crore (sale proceeds from the 14 flats) into a no-lien account.
c) Direction to disclose and deposit any further sale proceeds from the MoU dated Feb 2024 (Exhibit E).
d) Direction to disclose and produce complete books of account, bank statements, and records of the JV.
e) Grant ad-interim reliefs in the same terms pending final hearing.
f) Award the costs of this application.
g) Grant any other relief deemed just and proper.

Keep the tone formal. Use “this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to…” for each relief.”

This is the result that ChatGPT generated:

“21. In the circumstances aforesaid, the Applicant prays that this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to:
a) Restrain the Respondent, his servants, agents, representatives, and all persons acting through or under him, from in any manner selling, transferring, alienating, encumbering, or creating third-party rights in respect of the remaining 37 unsold flats constructed under the Aurum Heights Partnership project at Lonavala;

b) Direct the Respondent to deposit a sum of ₹2,89,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Eighty-Nine Lakh only), being the sale proceeds of 14 flats previously sold without the Applicant’s consent, into a no-lien escrow account as may be directed by this Hon’ble Tribunal;

c) Direct the Respondent to disclose and deposit into the said escrow account any further amounts received or receivable pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding dated 15 February 2024 (Exhibit E), or any other sale or transaction entered into in respect of the joint venture flats;

d) Direct the Respondent to furnish complete books of account, bank statements, sale registers, ledger entries, and all financial records of the Aurum Heights Partnership from inception till date for the inspection of the Applicant and this Hon’ble Tribunal;

e) Grant ad-interim reliefs in the same terms as prayed for in clauses (a) to (d) above pending the final hearing and disposal of this application;

f) Award costs of the present application in favour of the Applicant and against the Respondent; and

g) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper in the interest of justice.”

Finally, you ask GPT to give all the results in one go, and ask GPT to give the cause title also with the following prompt:

“Now, please compile the complete Section 17 application in one document with proper court formatting.

Include:

1. Cause title showing:

– Tribunal details (Sole Arbitrator: [Advocate Varun Sharma])

– Case reference number – Parties (Karan Desai vs Raghav Mehta)

– Subject: Application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for Interim measures

2. The complete body (paragraphs 1-21) that was drafted

3. Format it exactly as it would appear before the tribunal with proper spacing, paragraph numbering, and legal formatting

4. End with date and applicant and advocate signature lines.”

This is the final draft generated by ChatGPT.

But it requires certain modifications, which I have done below in red

BEFORE THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CONSISTING OF

MR. VARUN SHARMA, SOLE ARBITRATOR

ADVOCATE

(APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 17 OF THE ARBITRATION

AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 FOR INTERIM MEASURES)

Karan Desai

….Claimant

v/s

~~Mr.~~ Raghav Mehta

…Respondent

The Applicant Most respectfully submits as under:

The Applicant and the Respondent are first cousins and long-standing business associates who are jointly engaged in a real estate venture ~~through~~ under a partnership arrangement.
On 12 March 2012, the Applicant and the Respondent executed and registered a Deed of Partnership under the firm name and style of “Aurum Heights Partnership” for the purpose of acquiring land and undertaking a residential development project. A true copy of the Partnership Deed is hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit “A”.
The parties jointly acquired a plot of land in Lonavala, Maharashtra, where they commenced construction of a residential housing project consisting of 64 flats. The land was registered in the name of the partnership firm.
As per the terms of the partnership, all profits and losses were to be equally shared, and both parties were to participate in the management of the project on equal footing.

In or around early 2017, the Applicant discovered that the Respondent had unilaterally executed private sale agreements for 14 flats in ~~the~~ a joint venture project, without the knowledge or consent of the Applicant.
The Applicant ~~has~~ obtained copies of 14 sale agreements executed by the Respondent without consent, which cumulatively reveal a total consideration of approximately ₹2,89,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Eighty Nine Lakh only). These proceeds were diverted to a separate account operated solely by the Respondent. Copies of the said sale agreements and bank records are hereto annexed and marked as Exhibits “B” and “C”, respectively.

In 2018, the Respondent purported to unilaterally remove the Applicant from the partnership by executing a forged and unregistered amendment to the Partnership Deed. A copy of the said forged amendment is annexed and marked as Exhibit “D”.
The Applicant confronted the Respondent, but was denied any explanation and the Applicant was thereafter excluded from all operational, financial, and managerial affairs of the project.
The Applicant has since then been prevented from accessing the project site, financial accounts, and sales documentation, despite repeated oral and written requests.
The acts of the Respondent constitute a fundamental breach of the fiduciary duties owed by a partner and a calculated attempt to wrongfully appropriate joint venture assets to the exclusion of the Applicant.

In 2021, the Applicant filed a petition under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before the Hon’ble District Court at Pune, seeking interim protection against unauthorized dealings by the Respondent.
The Court granted temporary relief, restraining further sale of flats. However, upon the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, the said petition was disposed of.
A sole arbitrator was appointed by mutual consent, and arbitral proceedings have since commenced.
The Applicant has filed the Statement of Claim. The Respondent is yet to file a Statement of Defence.
In February 2024, the Applicant obtained a copy of a Memorandum of Understanding executed by the Respondent, purporting to create third-party rights in 10 unsold flats. A copy of the said MoU is annexed and marked as Exhibit “E”.
The Respondent has once again failed to disclose these transactions or seek the consent of the Applicant.
The Applicant continues to be denied access to books of accounts, sales registers, partnership correspondence, and bank accounts.
These actions show a consistent pattern of concealment and unilateral appropriation of joint assets.
The Applicant has a genuine apprehension that the Respondent will continue disposing of joint venture assets, thereby rendering the outcome of the arbitration infructuous.

It is therefore necessary that this Hon’ble Tribunal protect the subject matter of the dispute by granting interim relief.

In the circumstances aforesaid, the Applicant prays that this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to:

a) Restrain the Respondent, his servants, agents, representatives, and all persons acting through or under him, from in any manner selling, transferring, alienating, encumbering, or creating third-party rights in respect of the remaining 37 unsold flats constructed under the Aurum Heights Partnership project at Lonavala;

e) Grant ad-interim reliefs in the same terms as prayed for in clauses (a) to (d) above pending the final hearing and disposal of this application.

f) Award costs of the present application in favour of the Applicant and against the Respondent; and

g) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper in the interest of justice.

Dated this _____ day of __________2025.

Advocates of the Applicant

Applicant

Conclusion

Whether you are dealing with partnership disputes, corporate misconduct, or any other urgent arbitration matter, the real game-changer isn’t just understanding Section 17; it is mastering how AI can transform your drafting from good to unstoppable.

While other lawyers spend days researching and struggling with structure, you can use AI to craft compelling documents nd ensure perfect procedural compliance.

AI is not making lawyers disappear, but it is making smart lawyers dominate.

The combination of Section 17‘s power with AI assistance can turn a solo practitioner into a force that competes with the largest firms.

The revolution is already here, and it is not waiting for anyone.

The question is simple: Will you join the lawyers racing ahead with AI-powered practice, or watch from the sidelines as others transform the profession?

Your choice will determine whether you lead the future of arbitration practice or become part of its past.

Frequently asked questions (FAQs):

1. How does Section 17 differ from Section 9 of the Arbitration Act?

Section 17 allows arbitral tribunals to grant interim relief, but only during arbitration proceedings (i.e., after the tribunal is constituted and before the final award).

Section 9, in contrast, permits courts to grant interim relief before, during, or after arbitration, including against third parties or in cases where the tribunal is not yet functional.

However, as per section 9(3), if the Court finds that circumstances exist which may not render the remedy provided under section 17 efficacious, then it may entertain a petition under section 9 of the Act.

2. Can orders passed under section 17 of the Arbitration Act be enforced against third parties?

No. Orders passed under section 17 of the Act bind only the parties to the arbitration agreement

3. How can AI assist in drafting a Section 17 application?

AI tools, like ChatGPT, amplify legal drafting by:

Structuring thought processes: AI can prompt relevant questions to gather case-specific details (e.g., parties, dispute, urgency).
Organising facts: AI helps present facts logically, ensuring clarity and persuasiveness.
Drafting precise pleadings: With precise prompts, AI can generate fact-specific paragraphs, avoiding generic templates.
Ensuring procedural compliance: AI can format applications per tribunal requirements and suggest legal provisions or case law.
Saving time: AI accelerates research and drafting

4. What makes a good AI prompt for drafting a Section 17 application?

A good prompt is specific, structured, and case-focused. The key elements include:

Clearly stating the task (e.g., drafting a Section 17 application).
Providing case details (parties, dispute, urgency, documents).
Specifying desired output (e.g., numbered paragraphs, prayer clause).
Instructing AI to ask clarifying questions if details are missing.
Avoid vague requests like “draft an application” to prevent generic outputs.

5. How can you challenge the order passed under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996?

An appeal can be filed to a court under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996, from an order of the arbitral tribunal granting or refusing to grant an interim measure under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996.