Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

1. The appellant impugns the order dated 06.09.2012 of the learned Single Judge in the course of execution of an arbitral Award dated 25.06.2002 having force of a decree under Section 36 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act).

2. The arbitral Award dated 25.06.2002, insofar as relevant for the present purposes, awarded interest to the respondent/decree holder against the appellant/judgment debtor on the amounts awarded, at the rate of 20%per annum pre-arbitration and pendente lite and at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of the Award till the date of recovery.

3. OMP No.308/2002 under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act preferred by the appellant/judgment debtor impugning the said Award was dismissed on 20.01.2003.

4. FAO(OS) No.59/2003 preferred by the appellant/judgment debtor the reagainst was also dismissed on 09.11.2004.

5. Civil Appeal No.1094/2006 arising out of SLP(Civil) 3777/2005 preferred by the appellant/judgment debtor was also dismissed on 12.02.2008. However, the Supreme Court reduced the rate of interest awarded by the Arbitrator for the pre-award period from 20% to 18%.

6. The respondent/decree holder then applied for execution of the Award. During the execution proceedings a question arose whether the amounts deposited by the appellant/judgment debtor in terms of interim orders during the proceedings aforesaid, are to be appropriated first towards interest or principal. Order dated 19.11.2008 of the executing Court in this regard was challenged in EFA(OS) No.4/2009 and the order dated 20.07.2009 of the Division Bench in the said appeal became the subject matter of Civil Appeal No.9763/2011 (arising out of SLP (Civil) 18509/2009) disposed of by the Supreme Court on 15.11.2011. Need is however not felt to discuss in detail the controversy in the said proceedings, the same having been succinctly set out in the impugned order of the learned Single Judge and the same having not much relevance to the issue in hand.

7. Thereafter a dispute arose as to whether the interest awarded of 15% per anuum from the date of the Award to the date of the recovery, was to be on the principal amount awarded only or also on interest awarded (as reduced by the Supreme Court) for the pre- arbitration period and pendente lite the arbitration proceedings. EA No.696/2011 was filed by the respondent/decree holder giving the calculation of the amount of Rs.1,54,40,86,168/- due till then.

8. An affidavit in opposition was filed by the appellant/judgment debtor thereto, claiming that only a sum of Rs.1,46,76,45,561/- was due under the Award and which had already been paid. The difference in the two calculations was on account of the fact that while the respondent/decree holder was claiming post award interest at 15% per annum besides on the principal amount, also on the amount due towards pre-award interest and the appellant/judgment debtor was calculating the same only on the principal amount awarded and not on the amount towards pre-award interest.

9. The learned Single Judge in paras No.10 to 12 of the impugned order has noticed that though in the earlier round of appeal during the execution proceedings, the appellant/judgment debtor had before the Supreme Court raised the said issue but the Supreme Court did not pronounce of the said submission.

10. The learned Single Judge further held the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs. S.L. Arora & Company 2010 (3) SCC 690, relied upon by the appellant/judgment debtor, to be not applicable in view of the Award in the present case providing for post-award interest also on the amount due towards pre-award interest and the said part of the Award having not been interfered with, neither by the Single Judge nor by the Division Bench nor by the Supreme Court and for the reason of award of such post-award interest on pre-award interest amount, not amounting to compound interest.

11. The senior counsel for the appellant/judgment debtor ha