JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri S.M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Girish Chandra Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Both the applications under Article 227 being common in nature are being decided by means of this common judgment.

3. The present applications have been filed challenging the orders dated 24.04.2023 passed by Presiding Officer, Commercial Court No.2, Lucknow whereby the objection filed by the petitioner resisting the executions filed by the respondent came to be dismissed.

4. The facts in brief are that in between the petitioner and the respondent there was an agreement providing for an Arbitration Clause and on account of a dispute arising out of the said agreement, an Arbitral Tribunal was constituted. The Abitrator passed an award in favour of the respondent herein vide award order dated 04.04.2020. In the said award, the Arbitrator issued two directions to the respondents; firstly directing for reinstatement of the dealership and secondly awarding Rs.50,000/- as costs per month from the date of termination i.e. 20.06.2017 till the actual date of restoration of the dealership. The respondent, purporting to enforce the said award filed