I.P.MUKERJI,J. - (1.)We heard out the appeal on the point of maintainability. It is this. This appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent from the judgment and order dtd. 7/2/2022 of the learned single judge directing security to be furnished as a condition precedent to stay of the impugned award, does not lie before a Division Bench of this court. If the respondents succeed on this point, the question of hearing out the appeal on merits does not arise.
(2.)It would appear from the cause title of the application before the learned trial court, that it was described as one under Sec. 36(2) and (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The prayers were also in accordance with those Sec. asking for stay of operation of the arbitral award dtd. 1/10/2009 as corrected by the learned arbitrator's order dtd. 3/12/2019.
(3.)The learned single judge by his judgment and order dtd. 7/2/2022 rejected the offer of the appellant/ petitioner to furnish security in the form of an immovable property. If they could furnish a bank guarantee for Rs.7.93 crores to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar, Original Side within two weeks from the date of the order execution of the award would be stayed. In default the respondents would be free to execute the award.