- (1.) With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the appeal is decided finally at the admission stage.
(2.) The present appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act") is directed against the order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the court below") in application No.334/2012, whereby the court below has allowed the application of the respondent No.1-applicant filed under Section 9 of the said Act and restrained the appellants from encashing the bank guarantee dated 06.04.2011 as also the fixed deposit dated 13.09.2010, till the period of one month after the appointment of Arbitrator.
(3.) The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondent No.1 was awarded a contract pursuant to the tender No.NWR/S & C/JP_Sikar-LHU & SIKAR-CUR/GC/T/1RR dated 11.02.2011. It appears that in respect of the said contract, an agreement was entered into between the parties on 16.08.2011, however before signing of the agreement, the respondent No.1 had to furnish the performance guarantee in the form of bank guarantee and also the fixed deposit. Accordingly, the respondent No.1 had furnished the fixed deposit for Rs.13,19,300/- on 13.09.2010 and performance guarantee in the form of bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.1,07,06,100/- on 06.04.2011 (hereinafter referred to as "the bank guarantee in question"). It further appears that the certain disputes arose between the parties with regard to the execution of the contract in question. According to the appellants, the respondent No.1 had failed to carry out the terms and conditions of the contract, as a result of which the appellants had rescinded the contract vide the letter dated 14/15.02.2012, after giving notice of 48 hours on 04.05.2012 to the respondent No.1. It further appears that the said action of the appellants was challenged by the respondent No.1 by filing the writ petition being No.8395/2012 before this Court. This Court vide the order dated 30.05.2012 disposed of the said writ petition, alongwith one another writ petition being No.7828/2012, by directing that the bank guarantee shall not be encashed till 16.07.2012. It further appears that the respondent No.1, thereafter filed the application under Section 9 of the said Act before the court below seeking interim measures in respect of the bank guarantee and the fixed deposit furnished by it. The court below vide the ad-interim order dated 16.07.2012 had restrained the appellants from encashing the fixed deposit as well as the bank guarantee in question, till the final disposal of the application under Section 9 of the said Act. The court below, thereafter, vide the impugned order dated 02.05.2013 allowed the said application of the respondent No.1 filed under Section 9 of the said Act, confirming the earlier order passed on 16.07.2012 and further restrained the appellants from encashing the fixed deposit as well as the bank guarantee in question, till the period of one month after the appointment of the Arbitrator. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellants have filed the present appeal.;