These three revision petitions are directed against the Order dated 06.04.2009 in I.A.No.4/2009, 5/2009, 6/2009 in A.O.P.No.32/2008, 33/2008, 34/2008, respectively on the file of the learned District Judge, Nilgiris at Ooty, whereby and whereunder, the applications preferred by the first respondent to permit them to file a reply statement invoking Section 151 CPC were allowed.

2. The facts in all these revisions are identical and as such, the factual matrix as contained in C.R.P.(PD) No.1919/2009 is taken for the purpose of narrating the background facts.

The facts :-

C.R.P.(PD) No.1919/2009 :-

3. The proceedings in A.O.P.No.32/2008 was initiated by the first respondent under Section 34(2)(a) (IV) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as, the Act). The prayer in the Arbitration Original petition was to set aside the award passed by the second respondent.

4. In the original petition, the first respondent has detailed the reasons which according to them would be sufficient to set aside the award passed by the second respondent.

5. The original petition was contested by the revision petitioner by filing counter. The petitioner has countered