IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2011 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1933 Arb.A.No. 5 of 2011() -------------------------- OPARB.691/2010 of DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT ------------------------------------ M/S. PATI BEL J.V., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BHAGEERATHA ENGINEERING LTD., BHAGEERATHA RESIDENCY, BANERJEE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-30, REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH SRI.K.P.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. G.K.GRANITES, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT OORAKKAD, KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO., PIN-683 562, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SR.GEORGE ANTONY. 2. BHAGEERATHA ENGINEERING LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT BHAGEERATHA RESIDENCY, BANERJEE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-30. 3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT-1, 47/1795, II FLOOR, RAJADHANI COMPLEX, OPP. PRS HOSPITAL, KILLIPALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. R-1 BY SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADVS. SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SRI.JOSE ABRAHAM R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS ARBITRATION APPEALS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs. R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ Arb. Appeal NO: 5 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th April, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. Detailed arguments have been advanced by the counsel for the appellant and the first respondent in this appeal before us. Various interesting questions have been raised but we really do not get opportunity to go into all those interesting questions as we find that towards the end of the arguments a suggestion put across by us is accepted by the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. It is agreed that the impugned order shall stand modified and withdrawn if the appellant or the second respondent would furnish bank guarantee for an amount of Rs.2.5 crores to the satisfaction of the lower court. If such bank guarantee is offered, the learned Judge shall accept such bank guarantee and withdraw the impugned order. 3. This appeal is accordingly allowed to the above extent. Needless to say if such security is furnished the learned Judge shall withdraw the order and direct the third respondent to Arb.Appeal 5/2011 2 release to the appellant herein the amount of Rs.2.5 crores retained by the third respondent as per the impugned order. 4. We further clarify that in any event appellant shall at the stage of execution finally be entitled to raise all relevant contentions including the contention that the amount of Rs.2.5 crores is only receivable by the appellant and not amount which is due to the second respondent judgment debtor. All parties shall be entitled to advance their respective contentions finally at the stage of execution before the appropriate forum. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj Arb.Appeal 5/2011 3