(1) WE have heard learned counsel for both sides at considerable length. Ordinarily against an interlocutory order of this type, this court would not interfere, but having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case we are inclined to entertain the petition and modify the order of the High court as follows : RESPONDENT 1, Project & Equipment Corporation India Ltd. would be entitled to encash the bank guarantees to the extent of Rs. 4 crores in terms of the direction of the High court, i.e. on condition that in the event of it being found that the certificate was not proper and the encashment of the bank guarantee would not have followed, the principal-respondent 1 would be called upon to reimburse the amount to the petitioner. The balance amount of bank guarantee shall not be permitted to be encashed till disposal of the matter by the High court subject to the terms of our subsequent directions. (2) WE would add to the order of the High court an additional term namely in case it is ultimately decided that the guarantees should not have been encashed on the amount of Rs. 4 crores, which we permit to be encashed, the petitioner would be entitled to interest at the commercial rates. However, if it is ultimately decided that respondent 1 was entitled to the encashment of the entire guarantee on the balance amount of Rs. 1.88 crores respondent 1 would be entitled to interest also at the commercial rates. (3) WE request the learned chief justice of the Bombay High court to assign this suit to any learned judge, with less of work load so that the same could perhaps be disposed of within six weeks from commencement of the hearing after reopening of the court in January 1987 after winter holidays. (4) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the Syndicate Bank, we slightly modify the direction of the High court regarding method of deposit as directed by it. As and when the undertaking mentioned in the order of the High court is furnished, the bank would abide by the direction of the High court and instead of depositing the money that is Rs. 4 crores in court, directly pay the same to respondent 1. The prothonotary and Senior Master shall immediately give intimation of the fact of filing of the undertaking to the Syndicate Bank to enable compliance. 4 crores in court, directly pay the same to respondent 1. The prothonotary and Senior Master shall immediately give intimation of the fact of filing of the undertaking to the Syndicate Bank to enable compliance. The petitioner would keep alive the bank guarantee to the extent of Rs. 1.88 crores until the High court disposes of the matter or makes any further direction. (5) WHILE disposing of the matter the learned trial judge would not be bound by the observations made by the Division bench. (6) THE special leave petition is accordingly disposed of.