JUDGMENT - R.K. BATTA, J.:---The appellants have preferred these appeals under section 39(1)(vi) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter called as "the said Act") since objections raised by the appellants against the award were rejected and the award was made rule of the Court.

2.In both these appeals, preliminary objection has been raised by learned Advocates for the respondents that the appeals do not lie before the Division Bench since the appellants challenge the order passed overruling the objections filed by them and refusing to set aside the Award. In Arbitration Appeal 2/93, the value for the purpose of jurisdiction is Rs. 2,00,000/- approximately and in Arbitration Appeal 3/99, the value for the purpose of jurisdiction is stated to be Rs. 5,58,532/-. Learned Advocates for the respondents have contended that the impugned order do not have force of a decree and, as such, the appeal lies before the Single Judge in terms of Rule 2(1)(a)(v) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (hereinafter called as "the said Rules").

3.Learned Advocate Shri A.P. Lawande, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1 in Arbitration Appeal No. 2/93, has urged that in case of a Decree wh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document