M.SUNDAR, J.

This intra-court appeal is directed against an order dated 13.04.2017 made by a learned Single Judge on the Original Side of this court in two applications taken out under various sub sections of Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'A and C Act' for the sake of brevity).

2. Vide the aforesaid order dated 13.4.2017, which is a common order in two applications, learned Single Judge has granted interim measures sought for in both the applications under Section 9 of the A and C Act.

3. A perusal of the memorandum of grounds of Original Side Appeals in the instant intra-court appeal before us reveals that these appeals have been filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of the Original Side Rules of this Court read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. It is clearly impermissible, in the light of section 37 of the A and C Act and in the light of the elucidation on this aspect of the matter by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Fuerst Day Lawson Limited Vs. Jindal Exports Limited [(2011) 8 SCC 333]. Therefore, without standing on technicalities, we treat this as appeals under Section 37 of the A and C Act, under Section 37(1)(b) to be precise.

4. A thumbnail sketch of facts which are absolutely essential for appreciating this judgment are given below under the caption “Factual Matrix”.

FACTUAL MATRIX :

5(i). The nucleus of the entire matter is a Public Limited Company which goes by the name S.V. Sugar Mills Limited, which is hereinafter referred to as 'S.V.Sugars' for the sake of brevity and clarity.

5(ii). While S.V. Sugars is the nucleus of the matter, the genesis of the matter is a Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter referred to as 'MOU' for brevity) dated 31.7.2010 entered into between one T.Rajendran, representing a consortium of Investors, M.Ethiraj (respondent No.1 before us in the instant appeals) and S.V.Sugars. In sum and substance, the MOU contemplates sale of 100 % shares in S.V.Sugars to the consortium of Investors represented by Mr.T.Rajendran for a total consideration of Rs.20 Crores. To be noted, Mr.M.Ethiraj has the authority and represents all the shareholders of S.V.Sugars, M.Ethiraj himself being one of the shareholders in S.V.Sugars.

5(iii). Owing to very many reasons, time frame set out in MOU could not be adhered to, resulting in two extension agreement. The first extension agreement is dated 18.02.2011 and the second extension agreement is dated 12.12.2011.

5(iv). To be noted, two major bankers of S.V.Sugars are Indian Overseas Bank ('IOB' for brevity) and Bank of India ('BOI' for brevity). Vide letters dated 06.08.2012 and 15.11.2012, IOB and BOI respectively classified the accounts of S.V.Sugars as Non Performing Assets ('NPA' for brevity). Thereafter, there was a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act' for brevity) issued by BOI and One Time Settlement (hereinafter referred to as 'OTS' for brevity) acceptance letter from IOB dated 30.09.2013.

5(v). After all this, an agreement dated 09.10.2013 came to be executed. One Shinago Holdings Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Shinago' for brevity), a private limited company in India, M.Ethiraj (respondent No.1 before us), Binny Engineering Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Binny Ltd.' for brevity), a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and S.V.Sugars are parties to this agreement dated 09.10.2013. This agreement is hereinafter referred to as 'said agreement' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity.

5(vi). In and by the said agreement, parties agreed that the aforesaid MOU still holds good as on the date of the said agreement. In sum and substance, under the said agreement, it was agreed that 100% shares in S.V.Sugars (all the shareholders being represented by M.Ethiraj) will be transferred to Shinago, which is now the In