JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Anil Sharma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri P. K. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Pranab Kumar Ganguli, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 08.08.2022 passed by Commercial Court, Varanasi i.e. respondent no. 1 in Execution Case No. 24 of 2020 (Old Case No. 21/2012) and additional award dated 21.02.2006 passed by Arbitrator in the matter of M/s Vidhyawati Construction Col vs. IOCL and another .

3. Since, only legal question is involved in the present petition and pleadings have been exchanged between the parties, therefore, with the consent of parties, petition is being decided at the admission stage itself.

4. Brief facts of the case are that Original Suit No. 436 of 1989 was filed on 01.07.1989 for appointment of Arbitrator in accordance with provision of ARBITRATION ACT , 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Old Act, 1940), which was applicable at that time. Vide order dated 12.8.1991, learned Civil Court appointed Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.P. Singh (Retired) sole arbitrator to decide the dispute. Due to pending litigation proceedings, Arbitration could only commence in the year 2001 and Arbitrator has issued notice dated 07.05.2001. Statement of claim was filed by the respondent no.2 on 24.5.2001 before the Arbitrator upon which petitioner had filed a detailed objection and also counter claim. Arbitrator has passed order dated 14.04.2002 to continue the proceeding as per provision of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'New Act, 1996). Ultimately, arbitration proceeding was completed and award was given on 27.04.2005 partly in favour petitioner and respondents both. After calculating the amount, it was found that respondent has to pay Rs. 7,79,871/-to the petitioner. Thereafter, Arbitrator has sent the original records to Additional District Judge,-IX, Civil Court, Varanasi on the same day i.e. 27.04.2005. Respondent had moved application under Section 33 of the New Act, 1996 for modification of award. Arbitrator has additional the award vide order dated 21.02.2006.

5. The said award was challenged before this Court by filing petition Under Article 227 No. 30461 of 2006, which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.05.2012 with liberty to file application under Section 34 of Act, 1996. Application was filed under Section 34 of New Act, 1996, which was registered as Arbitration Case No. 79 of 2012 and the same was dismissed vide order dated 23.03.2013. Against that order, petitioner has preferred First Appeal From Order No. 1584 of 2013, which was also dismissed vide order dated 08.04.2016. As respondent was also aggrieved with the certain observations made in the award, therefore, he has preferred Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 681 of 2017, which was dismissed vide order dated 20.01.2017 after deleting the certain observations made in the order dated 8.4.2016 passed in First Appeal From Order No. 1584 of 2013. Ultimately, award has attained finality.

6. Respondents have filed Execution Application No. 21 of 2012 (renumbered as Execution Application No. 24 of 2020), in which petitioner has filed objection under Section 47 of CPC and same was rejected vide order dated 08.08.2022. Hence, order dated 08.08.2022 is under challenge before this Court.

7. Aforesaid facts are not disputed between the parties.

8. Sri Anil Sharma, learned Senior Counsel submitted that arbitration proceedings was initiated under Old Act, 19