S.C. AGRAWAL, J.- Since these special leave petitions arise out of the same proceedings in the High Court they are being disposed of by a common order.

2.R.M. Investment & Trading Co. Pvt. Limited (for short "RMI"), the petitioner in these petitions, is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. Sometime in or around 1986, RMI entered into an agreement with Boeing Company (for short "Boeing"), a company incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in the United States of America, whereunder RMI agreed to provide Boeing with consultant services for promotion of sale of Boeing aircraft in India. The said agreement was initially to be operative till 31-12-1986, but by subsequent agreement it was extended till 30-4-1987. In August 1987, Definitive Purchase Agreements for purchase of two aircraft were executed between Boeing and Air India, a body corporate constituted under the Air Corporation Act, 1953. RMI claimed commission from Boeing on the said transaction but Boeing refused to pay the same and thereupon in April 1990, RMI filed a suit (Suit No. 363 of 1990) on the original side of the Calcutta High Court against Boeing for the recovery of U.S. $ 17.5 million equivalent to Rs 10,07,12,500,00 (sic) by way of compensation and remuneration on the basis of the terms of Consultant Services Agreement along with other incidental reliefs. The Consultant Services Agreement contains (in paragraph 10) an arbitration clause which provides that "any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this agreement, or any breach thereof, which the parties have not been able with due diligence to settle amicably, shall be settled by arbitration conducted in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association". In the said suit RMI filed an application for injunction and an interim order was passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court on 17-7-1992, whereby it was directed that if any payment is made by Air India to Boeing, Boeing shall retain a sum of U.S. $ 17.5 million with Air India. On 13-8-1992, Boeing moved an application under Section 3 of the Foreign Awards (Recognition & Enforcement) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ’Act’) for the stay of the said suit on the ground that the subject-matter of the suit was covered by the arbitration clause and that Boeing was willing to do everything necessary for the proper conduct of the arbitration. On the same date RMI filed an application for amendment of the plaint and for addition of Air India as a party defendant to the suit. On 14-8-1992, learned trial Judge passed an order staying the suit and all proceedings except the pending interlocutory application. On 18-81992, Boeing moved an application for vacating the interim order passed on on 17-7-1992. By order dated 5-4- 1993, the learned trial Judge dismissed the application filed by Boeing for staying the suit. Boeing filed an appeal (Appeal No. 295 of 1993) against the said order of the learned trial Judge. The said appeal has been allowed by a Division Bench of the High Court by judgment dated 14- 10-1993. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 20139 of 544 1993 is directed against the said judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court.