ORDER 1. The present misc. application has been filed on behalf of the respondent-claimant under Section 152 CPC seeking correction of accidental slip in para No.26 of the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by this Court. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant-claimant Mr. S.D. Singh submitted that this Court though has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-non claimants and has upheld the order dated 10.09.2012 passed by the Additional District Judge No.2, Ajmer in Civil Misc. Case No. 157/2008 (142/2003) whereby the appeal filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter 'the Act of 1996') by the appellant, was partly allowed by reducing the interest and the award dated 15.01.2003, was upheld by the Sole Arbitrator, however, this Court while dismissing the appeal in concluding para 26 of the said order dated 08.09.2021, has vacated the interim order dated 21.02.2014 passed by this Court in the appeal and the Registrar (Judicial) has been directed to release the FDR to the appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the claimant submitted that this Court on 21.02.2014 while disposing of the stay application (S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.3671/2012) directed that principal amount of Rs.97,10,241/- as determined by Additional District Judge No.2, Ajmer was to be deposited by the appellant within a period of one month by way of FDR for a period of one year in the name of Deputy Registrar (Judicial), Rajasthan High Court Bench Jaipur and disbursement was to be abided by the outcome of the appeal. 4. Learned counsel submitted that the decree-holder is now entitled for the said amount and the FDR, which has been made in the name of Deputy Registrar (Judicial), is required to be returned to the claimant along-with interest which accrued on the FDR till date. 5. Learned counsel further submitted that once the appeal of the State of Rajasthan has been dismissed and stay order has also been vacated, the natural corollary of the dismissal of the appeal, is to make payment to the claimant. 6. 5. Learned counsel further submitted that once the appeal of the State of Rajasthan has been dismissed and stay order has also been vacated, the natural corollary of the dismissal of the appeal, is to make payment to the claimant. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant-claimant Mr.S.D. Singh further submitted that in case, this Court is not inclined to modify the order to give direction to release the payment in favour of the claimant then, direction may be given to transfer the amount which is lying in FDR in the name of Deputy Registrar (Judicial), Rajasthan High Court Bench Jaipur and the same may be transferred to the Executing Court. 7. Learned counsel submitted that the Execution Application No.4/2014 is still pending in the Court of Additional District Judge No.2, Ajmer and as such, necessary exercise may be taken by the Executing Court about entitlement of the money in favour of the decree-holder. 8. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. Anil Mehta appearing for the appellant-State submitted that this Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the State, however, direction has rightly been given by this Court to release the FDR in favour of the appellant-State. 9. Learned AAG submitted that any amount which is due to the decree-holder is to be decided and determined by the Executing Court and as such, this Court has rightly passed the order. 10. Learned AAG further submitted that the prayer made by the claimant is like converting this Court as an Executing Court and the same may not be done by this Court. 11. Learned AAG further submitted that as per Section 36 of the Act of 1996, any enforcement of arbitral award is to be made as per provisions contained in CPC in the same manner as if it were a decree of the Court. 12. Learned AAG submitted that straightway direction to release any amount in favour of the claimant would be in gross violation of the mandatory requirement of Section 36 of the Act of 1996. 13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 14. 12. Learned AAG submitted that straightway direction to release any amount in favour of the claimant would be in gross violation of the mandatory requirement of Section 36 of the Act of 1996. 13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 14. This Court finds that at the time of admission of appeal, this Court on 21.02.2014 had passed the conditional order in the stay application and had directed that principal amount, as determined by the Additional District Judge No.2, Ajmer, was to be deposited by the appellant-State within a period of one month by way of FDR for a period of one year in the name of Deputy Registrar (Judicial), Rajasthan High Court Bench Jaipur and disbursement was to abide by the outcome of the appeal. 15. This Court finds that while dismissing the appeal on 08.09.2021, the interim order dated 21.02.2014 was vacated and this Court also directed the Registrar (Judicial) to release the FDR to the appellant. 16. This Court finds that the direction to release the FDR in favour of the appellant would not be appropriate as money which was lying in the FDR in the name of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) needs, to be transferred to the Executing Court. 17. This Court further finds that it is for the Executing Court to consider the claim of the rival parties and to pass order accordingly. The direction to release the FDR in favour of the appellant will not be in consonance with the provisions which are essential for maintaining the execution of decree by the Executing Court. 18. This Court, accordingly, modifies the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by this Court and in para 26 of the said order, the direction given to Registrar (Judicial) to release FDR in favour of the appellant is modified to the effect that he will release the FDR along-with interest, in FDR till date either by preparing the Demand Draft or transferring the money online directly to the Executing Court i.e. Additional District Judge No.2, Ajmer in Execution Application No.4/2014. The said exercise may be undertaken within a period of three weeks. 19. Accordingly, the application filed by the claimant stands disposed of. 20. This order shall be treated as part and parcel of the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.4988/2012.