1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. APPEAL NO.981 OF 2005 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO.137 OF 2004 Messrs Sham Lal Bankey Bihari .. Appellant v/s. Messrs Kailash & Co. .. Respondent Mr.Ajay Panicker for the appellant. CORAM : R.M.LODHA AND D.G.KARNIK, JJ. DATED : 19th November, 2005 P.C. Heard. 2. We perused the order dated 18th June, 2004, passed in Arbitration Petition and subsequent order dated 10th June, 2005, passed in the Review Petition. 3. It appears to us that no argument was advanced by the appellant (petitioner therein) that the arbitral tribunal took on record various documents placed by the respondent at the back of the present appellant after the arguments were concluded. In this view of the matter, we are not inclined to permit the appellant to agitate the issue that the arbitral tribunal took on record various documents placed by the respondent after the arguments were concluded and that too at the back of the appellant. 2 4. In his order dated 18th June, 2004, the learned Single Judge did not find any merit in the contention of the present appellant that there was no arbitration clause. We find no justifiable reason to take different view. 5. No case for setting aside the award under section 34 was made out and the learned Single Judge cannot be said to have erred in rejecting the arbitration petition. 6. Appeal is dismissed in limine. 7. Oral prayer for stay is rejected. (R.M.LODHA, (R.M.LODHA, (R.M.LODHA, J.) J.) J.) (D.G. (D.G. (D.G. KARNIK, J.) KARNIK, J.) KARNIK, J.)