JUDGMENT : Anoop V. Mohta, J. The present Second Appeal is filed by the Appellant under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act), who was the Petitioner in the Arbitration Petition, whereby Section 37 of the Act was invoked and challenged the refusal of interim order passed by the learned Arbitrator, pending the arbitration proceedings, in an Application under Section 17 of the Act. The District Judge has rejected the basic appeal. 2. In view of Section 37(3) of the Act of 1996, which is reproduced as under, no second Appeal lies before this Court, at the instance of one of the parties. “37. Appealable orders: (1) An appeal shall lie from the following orders (and from no others) to the Court authorised by law to hear appeals from original decrees of the Court passing the order, namely:- …............................. …............................. (b) granting or refusing to grant an interim measure under section 17. (3) No second appeal shall lie from an order passed in appeal under this section, but nothing in this section shall affect or taken away any right to appeal to the Supreme Court.” (emphasis added) 3. Section 5 of Arbitration Act also restricts the Court's intervention in a situation like this. The Second Appeal could not have been filed by the Applicant in the present case. Having once invoked the power of Appellate Court under Section 37 and in the present case, exercised by the District Court, the Second Appeal against such order before the High Court is not maintainable, except right to appeal to the Supreme Court. The mandate of provision (clause 3) itself is sufficient to dispose of the present Second Appeal, as not maintainable. Order accordingly. 4. In view of disposal of Appeal, NMA/1099/2014 and NMAST/1831/2014 also stand disposed of accordingly. 5. There shall be no order as to costs.