B-63, Gulmohar Park, New Delhi, India – 110 049 +91 98184 25550 info@internationaltradelaw.org WhatsApp

Anti-Suit Injunctions in India: When Will Courts Intervene?

·

·

An anti-suit injunction is an order restraining a party, not a foreign court, from starting or continuing proceedings in another jurisdiction. Because such an order indirectly affects foreign proceedings, Indian courts grant it with caution.

Infographic

Three core considerations
Anti-suit injunctions in India after Modi Entertainment Network (2003)
Personal jurisdiction
The defendant must be amenable to the jurisdiction of the Indian court.
Ends of justice
Refusing the injunction must be likely to defeat the ends of justice or perpetuate injustice.
Comity
Due regard must be given to the principle of comity, as the order affects a foreign court.

The governing principles

In Modi Entertainment Network v. W.S.G. Cricket Pte. Ltd. (2003), the Supreme Court of India set out the principal considerations: the defendant must be amenable to the personal jurisdiction of the Indian court; the court must be satisfied that refusing the injunction would defeat the ends of justice; and due regard must be given to comity.

Exclusive jurisdiction and arbitration clauses

Where parties have agreed on an exclusive forum or on arbitration, courts generally hold them to that bargain. Related questions arise where a party seeks to restrain a foreign arbitration, or where a foreign anti-suit order is met with an anti-anti-suit injunction.

Practical points

  • Move quickly: delay can weigh against relief.
  • Review the dispute resolution clause before any proceedings begin.
  • Consider parallel steps in the foreign forum with local counsel.
  • Keep positions in India and abroad consistent.

This note is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on a specific matter, please contact us.