stipulated period and in accordance with the terms prevailing at the time of closure of the issue, it did not extend to, nor could it be construed as covering, contingencies arising from any unilateral alteration of the contractual arrangements between Tommorrowland and the subscribers after the issue had been successfully completed. 66. At this juncture, we find it imperative to underscore that the controversy in the present case could not have been adjudicated without a proper application of the principles governing contracts of guarantee under the Indian Contract Act, 187235 . Regrettably, neither the contesting parties, despite the involvement of more than 260 Underwriters, nor the learned Arbitrator, nor even the learned Single Judge, addressed the dispute through the correct prism of statutory contract law. This omission strikes at the very root of the Impugned Award and the Judgment affirming it, as the legal relationship between Tommorrowland and the Underwriter is not merely contractual but is statutorily regulated under Chapter VIII of the IC Act. For the sake of ready and convenient reference, some of the relevant statutory provisions having a bearing on the issues arising in the present case are reproduced hereunder:
