( 1 ) PRESENT First Appeal under Section 37 (1) (a) of the Arbitration Conciliation Act,1996 (hereinafter referred to as Sthe Actwĉâ‚Å¡w‚uÂ) arises out of an order rendered in Arbitration Petition No. 120 of 2005 on 16th May,2005 by learned Joint District Judge, Vadodara. The order was passed in respect of an Application preferred by Hardy Oil and Gas Ltd.- present appellant (formerly known as SJehan Energy Ltd.) under Section 9 of the Act, praying for interim relief in following terms :s39. The petitioner, therefore, prays that pending the arbitration proceedings between the petitioner and the respondents : (a) The Respondents, their agents, servants be restrained from acting in breach of Agreement dated 14-10-1998 and Deed of Adherence dated 30-08-2991. They be further restrained from transacting any business that may require unanimous consent of the Board as stipulated in Code of Best Practice. The Respondents be further restrained from taking and/or implementing any steps that may dilute/jeopardize or otherwise affecting Plaintiffs status as 8. 5% share holders on Respondent No. 1 Company. (b) The Respondents, their agents, servants be ordered to appoint, nominate director representing the Petitioner Company as per the terms of Agreement dated 14-10-1998 and Deed of Adherence dated 30-08-2001. (c) Any other just, legal and appropriate relief may also be granted and (d) for ad interim reliefs in terms of prayer (a), (b) and (c) above (e) for costs of this Petition (K) for such further and other reliefs as the facts and circumstances of the case may require. By the impugned order, the said reliefs were refused and the application was dismissed and hence, this appeal. 2. In order that the contentions raised before this Court can be better appreciated, certain facts need to be stated. An agreement was entered into between Unocal Bharat limited (Unocal), Hardy Oil and Gas Limited, Netherland B. V. (Hardy), Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services limited (IL and FS), Housing Development Finance Corporation ltd. (HDFC) and Hindustan Oil Exploration Company Limited (the Company) on 14th October,1998. As per that agreement, the Company was floated with major share holders being unocal, Hardy, IL and FS and HDFC for the purpose of business of oil exploration. The said agreement carried an arbitration clause and the relevant provisions are contained in Para. 9. 5 of the said agreement. It would be appropriate to record here that although the appellant original applicant before the District Court, though name sounds very similar to Hardy in the agreement, is an altogether a different entity from Hardy in the agreement. It appears that the present appellant Hardy Oil and gas Limited formerly known as SJehan Energy Ltd. wĉâ‚Å¡w‚u (hereinafter referred to as wĉâ‚Å¡w‚uÂjehanwĉâ‚Å¡w‚uÂ) purchased the shares of hardy Oil and Gas, Netherland B. V. (subsequently known as sbritish Borneo Oil and Gas (Nederland) B. V. by an agreement dated 26th February,2001. That is how, Jehan has stepped the shoes of Hardy, who was a party to the agreement by virtue of a clause contained in the said agreement itself at 5. 10 (a) and (b ). A dispute has arisen between the parties and, therefore, by virtue of arbitration clause in the agreement, same is being referred to an Arbitral Tribunal. However, apprehending loss of right in the management, the appellant preferred application under Section 9 before the District court, Vadodara with the prayers as stated above and that prayer having been rejected, has preferred present appeal. 3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mihir Thakore appears with learned Advocate Ms. Nair for the appellant. Respondent Nos. 1 and 4 are represented by learned Senior Advocate B. J. Shelat and learned Advocate Mr. Soli Cooper appearing with mr. B. D. Karia, on caveat. Respondent No. 3 is represented by learned Advocate Mr. A. R. Gupta. 4. A preliminary objection as to maintainability of the applica