JUDGMENT :

I. P. MUKERJI, J.

1. Only one point was urged in this appeal: there is no arbitration agreement between the parties. Hence, the respondent could not have invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in this court or anywhere else seeking the protective measure of appointment of a Receiver over the equipments in question.

2. On 7th January, 2021 in a Section 9 application a learned single judge of this court appointed a Receiver over the assets under Sl. Nos. 3 to 6 of Annexure IV of the Memorandum of Understanding for settlement dated 30th June, 2020 between the parties with a direction to take their actual physical possession. It was held by the learned judge that as “lessee” of equipments the appellant had failed and neglected to pay the agreed amount of “lease rent” under the said memorandum and that these assets needed protection.

3. On 20th January, 2021 the appeal from this order was admitted and expedited with a modification in the impugned interim order to the effect that the Receiver could take possession of the assets but would not remove them from the site. The appellant would not use the equipments in any manner whatsoever.

4. Whether or not the