JUDGMENT :

Anant S. Dave, J.

Rule. Shri Keyur Gandhi, learned advocate for the respondent, waives service of rule for respondents.

2. At the joint request of learned senior counsels for the parties, this petition is taken up for final hearing, today itself.

3. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:

“(a) That the Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for records of the case and after going into the legality and validity thereof and set aside the impugned Order dated 16 July 2012 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge at Khambhalia, District Jamnagar, Gujarat;

(b) that pending hearing and final disposal of the present Application, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the impugned Order dated 16 July 2012 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge at Khambhalia, District Jamnagar, Gujarat;

(c) interim and ad-interim reliefs as terms of prayers Clause (b);

(d) for such further and other reliefs as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case”

4. All the three petitioners viz. INEOS Commercial Services UK Limited [for short, `ICSUL-1'], INEOS Europe Limited [for short, `IEL-2'] both incorporated under the laws of United Kingdom and INEOS USA LLC [for short, `IUL-3'] incorporated under the laws of Delaware, USA, are the companies incorporated outside India and are claimants in arbitration proceedings pending before the Arbitral Tribunal in Singapore, under the Singapore International Arbitration Act and are original defendant Nos.1 to 3 respectively. The respondent No.1-Essar Oil Limited [for short, `EOL’] is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and the plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No.16/2012 [for short, `the said suit’] filed in the court of learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Khambhalia, District Jamnagar. The respondent No.2-Essar Gujarat Petrochemicals Ltd. [for short, `the E.G.P.L.’] is the original defendant No. 4.

5. On 03.04.2008, 27.05.2008 and 30.06.2008, three different licence agreements were signed by the petitioners-defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and respondent No.2/defendant No.4 to exploit certain proprietary technology of the petitioners for the production of propylene polymers and catalysts for use in such process. That above three agreements have genesis in the negotiations between the petitioners and respondent No.1. On 19.08.2011 notices were issued to respondents upon failure of respondent No.2-EOL to make payments required under the licence and to agree for consolidated arbitration to be governed by U.N.C.I.T.R.A.L. Arbitration Rules. In reply to the above notice, on 19.09.2011 respondent No.1-plaintiff did not admit its liability as it was not party to any of the three agreements and it was not liable to pay claim amount as mentioned in the notice of arbitration. However, as per para 6 of the above notices, respondent No.1 agreed for consolidation of arbitration's under the licence agreements into one arbitration proceedings as proposed in para 1.3 of the notice of arbitration and further agreed for applicability of U.N.C.I.T.R.A.L. Arbitration Rules for adjudicating dispute and appointed a Former Judge of Supreme Court of India as its Arbitrator. On 08.12.2011 the petitioners and respondents jointly submitted an agreed time table to the Arbitral Tribunal for the conduct of the arbitration proceedings. On 10.02.2012 the petitioners submitted the claim and in the backdrop of facts respondent No.1 moved an application on 26.03.2012 before the Arbitral Tribunal seeking its discharge from array of parties. The Arbitral Tribunal passed Procedural Order 1 on 11.04.2012, which reads as under:

“Having regard to the circumstances of this arbitration and the submissions by the Parties listed above, the Tribunal hereby defers any decision on its jurisdiction over R