( 1 ) I PROPOSE TO DISPOSE OF THE INTERIM APPLICATION filed IN THE PETITION UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE ARBITRATION and CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 IN WHICH APPLICATION THE petitioner HAS PRAYED FOR AN EX-PARTE ORDER RESTRAINING the RESPONDENT FROM ENCASHING SEVERAL BANK GUARANTEES. THIS PRAYER IS IN PARI MATERIA WITH THE FIFTH PRAYER IN the PETITION. ON 9. 9. 2003 MY LEARNED BROTHER HAD GRANTED an INTERIM INJUNCTION INTER ALIA FOR THE REASON THAT THE contract HAD NOT BEEN TERMINATED AND THEREFORE CLAUSE 22 of THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES HAD NOT COME INTO play; THAT NO REASONS HAD BEEN ASSIGNED FOR THE invocation OF THE BANK GUARANTEES; AND THAT ONCE THE BANK guarantees WERE ENCASHED THE ARBITRATION WOULD BE rendered ANFRACTUOUS. THE CONCERNED BANK HAS NOT BEEN impleaded IN THESE PROCEEDINGS.

( 2 ) THE HON ble SUPREME COURT HAS ON NUMEROUS occasions DEVOTED ITS ATTENTION AND TIME ON ENUNCIATING and REITERATING THE LAW ON PARAMETERS OF JURAL interference WITH THE INVOCATION/encashment OF LETTERS OF credit AND BANK GUARANTEES. THE LAW HAS BEEN SO crystalized IN ITS PRONOUNCEMENTS THAT IT ADMITS OF NO debate OR DOUBT. OVER A QUARTER CENTURY AGO, THE COURT had IN TARAPOR