JUDGMENT : Ananda Sen, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-State and learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed for restoration of Arbitration Appeal No. 11 of 2007. The Arbitration Appeal was filed under the Arbitration Act, 1940, which provides for applicability of the Code of Civil Procedure, thus, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed for restoration of Arbitration Appeal under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3. Arbitration Appeal No. 11 of 2007 was dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 16.12.2021. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said order has now been complied. 4. Opposite party opposes the restoration of Arbitration Appeal on the ground that the money, pursuant to the award has already been withdrawn in execution case and the Bank Guarantee was furnished. Now as the Arbitration Appeal was dismissed, Bank Guarantee was not renewed and the same has already lapsed. Counsel for the opposite party submits that restoration of Arbitration Appeal is not proper in view of the fact that the Bank Guarantee has already lapsed and has not been renewed. He further submits that there is an inordinate delay in filing this Civil Miscellaneous Petition for restoration. 5. After hearing the parties, I find that the ground of delay cannot be taken by the opposite party, as during that period entire country was going through the phase of Covid-2019. By virtue of order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India from time to time in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 stood excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings. By virtue of the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 also stood excluded in computing the period prescribed under Sections 23(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe periods of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings. 6. 6. So far as the ground for restoration is concerned, since the petitioner has already complied the order, I feel that the Arbitration Appeal is liable to be restored, but, as the Bank Guarantee has already lapsed, it will be open for the petitioner to file an appropriate application in the Arbitration Appeal, if they at all want to get revival of the bank guarantee. Accordingly, the Arbitration Appeal No. 11 of 2007 is ordered to be restored to its original file with the aforesaid observations. 7. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is, accordingly, allowed with the aforesaid observations.