1. This appeal is filed under section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) challenging the order dated 12th October, 2012 passed by the arbitral tribunal under section 17 of the Act continuing status quo order passed by this court. Some of the relevant facts are:

2. On 10th April, 2008 the franchise agreement was entered into between the parties whereby the respondent was granted a right to own and operate a team in the league subject to the terms and conditions set out therein. On 14th September, 2012 the appellant terminated the said Franchise agreement. The respondent filed Arbitration Petition (L) No. 1238 of 2012 in this court under section 9 of the Act for interim measures. After hearing both the parties, this court passed an order on 1st October, 2012 disposing off the said Arbitration Petition (L) No. 1238 of 2012. The said order was a conditional order granting stay of termination on respondent complying with various conditions including the condition to submit bank guarantee of Rs.100 Crores of a nationalized Bank on or before 9th October, 2012. Time to submit bank guarantee was extended till 12th October, 2012.

3. On 12th October, 2012 at 11.00 a.m. the respondent applied for extension of time to furnish bank guarantee. It is not in dispute that the said application made by the respondent for extension of time to furnish the bank guarantee was declined by this court. The arbitral tribunal issued a notice convening a meeting for issuing directions on 12th October, 2012 at 5.00 p.m. It is not in dispute that the meeting begun around 5.30 p.m. After directions were given by the arbitral tribunal the respondent filed an application under section 17 of the Act for interim measures. The respondent prayed that pending the hearing and final disposal of the arbitration proceedings, the arbitral tribunal be pleased to stay the termination of the Franchise agreement and maintain status quo as per order dated 1st October 2012 passed by this Court. By an order dated 12th October 2012, the arbitral tribunal after recording submissions of both the parties, passed the following order:

“Status quo granted by the Hon'ble High Court and continued till to-day, i.e. 12.10.2012 5.00 p.m. is ordered to continue. The application for interim relief will be heard by the Tribunal on 17.10.2012 at 11.30 a.m.”

4. From the perusal of the order passed by the arbtiral tribunal, it is clear that the prayer for continuation of status quo order prayed for by the respondent was strongly objected by the appellant. The appellant pointed out that termination of contract came into effect and grant of any status quo would virtually amount to grant of mandatory relief. The arbitral tribunal however took a view that when the status quo had been granted by this court and was operative till 5.00 p.m. of 12th October, 2012, it would be in the interest of justice if it was directed to be continued for some time by giving an opportunity to the BCCI to file its response to the application submitted by the respondent herein.

5. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 12th October, 2012, the appellant filed this appeal under section 37 of the Act. In view of the extreme urgency the matter was moved in Chambers on 13th October, 2012 when both the parties were heard by this court. On 13th October, 2012 this court passed a detailed order granting ad interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) of the Civil Application and the effect, implementation and operation of the impugned order dated 12th October, 2012 passed by the arbitral tribunal came to be stayed. The respondents have not challenged the said order dated 13th October, 2012 passed by this court granting ad interim stay of the operation of the order order passed by the arbitral tribunal on 12th October, 2012.

6. The learned senior counsel Mr. T.N. Subramanian, appearing for the appellant, submits that the order passed by this court on 12th October, 2012 was