1. C.R.P. No. 1511 of 1997 is against the Order in (Arbitration) O.P. No. 394 of 1994, and revision petitioners are the petitioners in the O.P. also. That O.P. was filed under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, to declare that there was no reference of disputes to respondents 1 and 2 by petitioners, to declare that respondents 1 and 2 were never appointed as Arbitrators, to declare that the letter dated 24.8,1993 purporting to appoint respondents 1 and 2 as arbitrators is forged, null and void, to declare that the document dated 310. 1994 styled as Interim Award is null and void and not binding on the petitioners, and for consequential reliefs.

2. C.R.P. No. 1661 of 1997 is against the Order passed in (Arbitration) O.P. No. 425 of 1994, filed by the respondents 3 to 15 herein to pass a decree in terms of the Award of the Arbitrators who are respondents 1 and 2 therein.

3. C.M.A. No. 787 of 1997 arises from O.P. No. 50 of 1996 filed by the petitioners herein to set aside the Interim Award dated 310. 1994.

4. All the three O.Ps. were disposed of by a common order by the Lower Court whereby it dismissed O.P. No. 394 of 1994. In O.P. No. 425 of 1994, the lower cou