Valmiki J. Mehta, J.

Caveat Nos.670-71/2015 in Arb. A. No.32/2015

1. Counsel appears for the caveator and thus the caveat stands discharged.

Arb. A. No.32/2015, I.A. No.13395/2015 (stay) and I.A. Nos.13396-97/2015 (exemption)

2. This is an appeal under Section 37(2)(b) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 impugning the order of the Arbitrator dated 6.7.2015. Arbitrator by the impugned order has vacated the interim order granted in favour of the appellant herein and by which interim order respondent herein was restrained from encashing the subject bank guarantee dated 23.2.2011 (extended from time to time thereafter) for a total sum of Rs.11,46,36,536/-.

3. Since the impugned order of the Arbitrator in the opinion of this Court is a crisp order containing exhaustively the relevant facts, issues and reasoning, it would be apposite if I reproduce the short impugned order, and the same reads as under:-

“ORDER

DATED 6.7.2015

The claimant has filed an application before the Tribunal on 20.6.2015 for seeking restrain against the Respondent from encashing/invoking the Bank Guarantee No.550LG0816/10 issued by ING Vyas Bank Mumbai dated 23.2.2011. They also stated that the Claimant is