Arbitral award set aside: court cannot use an interim order to enforce payment without a valid decree in place.

Once an arbitral award has been set aside, no operative award remains that can be executed or treated as a decree. Execution can arise only after the award is made a rule of court and a decree is drawn in those terms. In the absence of any valid decree, a court cannot use an interim order to direct payment of the amount claimed or otherwise grant relief that would amount to executing a non-existent award. The High Court's payment direction was therefore without jurisdiction and could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after the award had been set aside and the matter remitted for fresh arbitration, the High Court could pass an interim order directing payment of the amount claimed on the basis of the award and the materials on record.

Analysis: Once the Civil Judge had set aside the award, no award remained in existence that could be executed or treated as a decree. Execution could arise only after an award was made a rule of court and a decree was drawn up in terms thereof. In the absence of any operative award or decree, the High Court lacked jurisdiction to direct payment in execution-like terms. An interim order could not be used to achieve the effect of executing a decree that did not exist in law.

Conclusion: The High Court's interim direction for payment was without jurisdiction and could not be sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an arbitral award has been set aside and no decree in terms of the award exists, a court cannot, by an interim order, effectively execute the non-existent award or grant relief that is available only upon a valid decree.

---