1. The plaintiff Lal Mahal Limited, then known as Shiv Nath Rai Harnarain (India) Ltd, prior to filing this suit, filed OMP No.300/2001 under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), pleading that:-

(i) M/s. Abdul Ghaffar Abdul Rehman, Karachi, Pakistan, respondent therein and defendant no. 2 in this suit, had during October – November, 2000 approached the plaintiff for buying sugar and a number of invoices were raised for supplying sugar and a number of contracts were entered into between the parties and shipments of sugar were sent by the plaintiff from India to the defendant no. 2 at Pakistan;

(ii) however the defendant no. 2 committed breach of contract with respect to the following three contracts:-

(1) Contract No. 2001- S.I/25 dated 12th January, 2001 for purchase of 3800 MT of sugar for a price of USD 988000.

(2) Contract No. 2001-S.I/26 dated 12th January, 2001 for purchase of 3800 MT of sugar for a price of USD 988000.

(3) Contract No. 2001-S.II/41 dated 28th February, 2001 for purchase of 12500 MT of sugar for a price of USD 3000000.

(iii) the defendant no. 2 failed to arrange payment of the entire quantity of goods subject matter of the aforesaid three contracts resulting in non-lifting of the said quantities of sugar and resultant loss to the plaintiff;

(iv) the plaintiff vide its letter dated 8th September, 2001 to the defendant no. 2 made a total demand of USD 584500 on the defendant no. 2 for compensation for such breach of contracts by the defendant no. 2; and,

(v) the plaintiff was approaching ICA for appointing an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes which had so arisen between the parties and pending the same was seeking interim measure of maintenance of status quo of cargo of unpaid sugar which had already been dispatched and which were in transit.

2. OMP No.300/2001 came up first before this Court on 3rd October, 2001 when vide ex parte order the defendant no.2 was directed to maintain status quo as regard movement of sugar lying loaded in the Railway wagons. The said interim order continued and the proceedings were adjourned from time to time.

3. Vide order dated 16th December, 2002 on the application of Railways for impleadment, Railways were impleaded as respondent no. 2 in the petition, to safeguard their claim for demurrage. Vide order dated 18th March, 2004, reasoning that the value of the sugar in transit qua which status quo had been ordered was being lost with the passage of time, the said sugar was ordered to be sold by the Railways through public auction and the sale proceeds ordered to be deposited in this Court. Subsequent order dated 28th May, 2004 records that a total sum of Rs.1,95,30,000/- had been deposited in this Court by the Railways and the same was ordered to be kept in a fixed deposit.

4. Vide order dated 24th September, 2004 a sum of Rs.19,70,064/- and Rs.2,33,800/- out of the amounts lying deposited in this Court were ordered to be paid to the Excise Authorities. However on the defendant no. 2 preferring SLP (C) No.21127/2004 vide order dated 1st October, 2004, disbursement of the said amounts was stayed. However thereafter vide order dated 24th August, 2006 the Special Leave Petition was disposed of directing the expeditious disposal of the OMP. However OMP No.300/2001 continued to languish, with plethora of applications being filed by all the parties.

5. On 15th September, 2008, the counsel for the plaintiff handed over in the Court an order dated 11th September, 2008 of the Arbitrator based at Singapore directing that during the pendency of the application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act filed by the plaintiff, the monies deposited in this Court to remain deposited in the interest bearing account. The counsel for the defendant No.2 on that date stated that since the plaintiff had already approached the Arbitrator for an interim order, no further orders were required in OMP No.300/2001 and the same was liable to be disposed of. The