A. Shankar Narayana, J.

These two miscellaneous appeals are preferred under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, aggrieved of the common order, dated 2nd April, 2014, in O.P. Nos.154 and 178 of 2014, passed by the learned II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, by the petitioner in both the O.Ps.

2. In O.P. No.154 of 2014 filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1999 (for short the Act), the petitioner sought direction restraining the 1st respondent not to en-cash the bank guarantees invoked by it issued by the 2nd respondent and also restraining the 2nd respondent from honouring/disbursing the guarantee amount under both bank guarantees shown in the schedule furnished by the bank to the 1st respondent. In O.P. No.178 of 2014 filed under Section 9 of the very same provision, petitioner sought the relief to restrain the 1st respondent from presenting the D.D. No.169498, dated 31-12-2014 for Rs.10,00,00,000/- issued by the State Bank of India, Commercial Branch, Secunderabad 2nd respondent payable at State Bank of India, Main Branch, Mumbai and D.D. No.169498, dated 31-01-2014, for a sum of Rs.16,72,50,000/- issued by the 2nd respondent payable at the State Bank of India, Main Branch, Mumbai for encashment of the same and also to restrain the 2nd and 3rd respondents or any of their branches from honouring the said two D.Ds. and paying the amounts on presentation of the same by the 1st respondent for encashment and also to pass an injunction restraining the 2nd respondent from enforcing the securities deposited by the petitioner with them.

3. During the pendency of both the petitions before the Court below, the interim orders passed on 03-02-2014 and 05-02-2014 respectively in the said O.Ps., were vacated by the final common order, dated 02-04-2014.

4. The fact-situation occurring in both the original petitions for the purpose of disposal of these appeals are concerned is, originally, TK Toll Road Pvt. Ltd. entered into a concession agreement with National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) on 19-07-2007. The said company in turn entered into an EPC contract with M/s Reliance Utility Engineers Limited, the 1st respondent herein on 31-01-2008. The 1st respondent was formerly known as Utility Energy-tech and Engineers Pvt. Limited, but in the year 2010, its name was changed and came to be known by its present nomenclature. The 1st respondent, in turn, sub-delegated the work assigned to it by entering into a construction agreement with M/s. Techtrans Construction India Pvt. Ltd. and Ksheeraabad Constructions Pvt. Ltd., joint venture, the appellant herein on 14-03-2008.

i) The scope of the work so far as the contract between the petitioner and the 1st respondent is concerned, it was limited to laying the road chainage, which in turn was divided into two sections, wherein the 1st respondent covered the chainage from Km. 0.00 to Km.17.00 (Trichy by-pass) and Km.153.23 to Km.190.00, and the second section covered the chainage from Km.190.00 to Km.218.00, admeasuring a total length of about 80 Kms.

ii) The terms of contract makes a provision for completion of the road chainage within 27 months from the initiation of the contract. A period of 30 months was provided for the said purpose and the land would be acquired and handed over to the Concessionaire within 12 months from the date of the concession agreement. The 1st respondent entered into the construction agreement three months after the date of concession agreement and, therefore, the period of completion was fixed as 27 months from the date of initiation as per the construction agreement. As per Article 5.1, responsibility is cast on the 1st respondent to procure the land and provide the same for construction to the petitioner.

iii) As per further terms, a performance bank guarantee for Rs.16,72,50,000/- was to be furnished by the petitioner in favour of the 1st respondent, and the petitioner got a counter guarantee issued by t