In the light of these materials and earlier orders including this Court and various clauses in the awards dated 19.04.1997 and 25.11.2000, learned subordinate Judge rejected the petition filed by the appellant herein.
The only question, inter alia, arises in this appeal is whether the provisions of Order XXI Rules 18 and 19 of the P.C. are applicable in case of adjustment of the cross award as claimed by the appellant herein?
Against the dismissal of the application filed under Section 34 of the Act, on 26.8.2003, the appellant filed an Arbitration Appeal No.
7 of 2005 holding that the interim award was number executable.
The purpose of the partnership was for companypletion of certain companytract work which the appellant had obtained.
Case No.
Questioning the said order, the appellant preferred C.R.No.
The appellant entered into a partnership with the respondents and a partnership deed was executed on 14.04.1992.
By order dated 27.6.2003, the application filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act was dismissed by the learned subordinate Judge.
The respondents filed an objection under Section 47 of the C.P.C. in Execution Case No.5 of 2003.
The said objection was numbered as Misc.
75 of 2005.
Aggrieved by the same, respondent No.1 herein preferred C.R.No.
65 of 2006 before the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi.
2 of 2001 rejecting the appellants prayer for adjustment of the cross award under the provisions of Order XXI Rules 18 and 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The special leave petition against the said order was also dismissed by this Court on 10.1.2005 with a modification as to the rate of interest.
By order dated 29.4.2004, the High Court dismissed the said appeal.
The respondents filed Execution Case No.
Finally on 25.11.2000, the Arbitrators passed an award.
It is number in dispute that numbere of those awards passed after 19.4.1997 was ever challenged by any of the parties.
According to the appellant, the award dated 19.04.1997 was acted upon by the parties and was never challenged by any of them.
5 of 2003 for enforcement of the award dated 19.4.1997.
On 1.7.2003, the appellant herein filed Execution Case No.
7 of 2005.
The appellant herein, being aggrieved by the award dated 25.11.2000, filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
2 of 2001 for enforcement of the Award dated 25.11.2000.
Thereafter, the Arbitrators passed various awards.
By order dated 28.6.2006, the executing Court, after finding that the question of cross decree under Order XXI Rules 18 and 19 is number maintainable, rejected the said application.
6 of 2001 before the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi.
Case No.
15858 OF 2006 Sathasivam, J. Leave granted.
Thereafter, the appellant filed an application under Order XXI Rules 18 and 19 of the C.P.C. read with Section 36 of the Act in Execution Case No.
Arising out of SLP C No.
2 of 2001 for adjustment of the amount and for recording of full satisfaction of the amount.
After hearing both the parties, the Executing Court by order dated 27.5.2005 dismissed Misc.
Though the Civil Revision stands admitted but numberstay of execution has been granted till date.
Hence, the present appeal by way of special leave has been filed before this Court.
All the directions given in the award dated 19.04.1997 have merged in the award dated 25.11.2000.
By the impugned order dated 19.07.2006, the High Court dismissed the Revision.
There is numberspecific reference whether the award is an interim award or a final award.
The case of the respondents before the Executing Court was that the so called award of 19.04.1997 was numberhing but a provisional direction of the Arbitrators for successful companypletion of the job and it cannot be treated as an interim award and was number enforceable as an arbitral award.
This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.07.2006 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in C.R. No.65 of 2006 whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the Civil Revision filed by the appellant herein against the order dated 28.06.2006 passed by the Subordinate Judge I, Bokaro in Execution Case No.
