CVCIGP II CLIENT ROSEHILL LTD Vs. SANJAY JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Section XXXVII of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as Act) and Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 has been filed by the appellants against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 1 st May, 2012 passed in OMP No.172/2012 whereby the appellants? petition under Section 9 of the Act was disposed of on the basis of undertakings given by the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4.

(2.) The main grievance of the appellants is that the said undertakings are defective and insufficient which do not provide enforceable protection against each of the respondents. The appellants have challenged the impugned order by stating that they have been denied interim measure of protection qua respondent No.3 despite of admitted fact that the cheques for Rs. 1,244,947,936/- issued by the respondent No.3 have been bounced and no undertaking was sought from the said respondent in order to secure the said amount.

(3.) Before dealing the rival contentions raised by the parties, it shall be useful to narrate the brief facts: