- 1 - 39.rpl.28.11.801.11 skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (L) NO. 28 OF 2011 IN ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 26 OF 2011 Ashok Kumar Santaprasad Singh ..Applicant -Versus- Navin R. Kamalaprasad Singh ..Respondent .......... Mr.H.R.Sharma for the Original Petitioner/Applicant. Mr.Ajit Sikarwande for the Respondent. .......... CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 29TH SEPTEMBER 2011. P.C. 1 The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that through inadvertence it was not pointed out by the review petitioner’s advocate when the order dated 18th February 2011 was passed that the applicant i.e. the review petitioner was a partner in the said firm. The respondent does not admit that the review petitioner is a partner of the said firm. - 2 - 39.rpl.28.11.801.11 2 The petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh application under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 3 The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent fairly states that a fresh application under section 11 will not be opposed on the ground that a similar application was dismissed by the order dated 18th February 2011 in Arbitration Application No.26 of 2011. However, the contention on merits as to whether or not the review petitioner was a partner, is kept open in such a application. The review petition is accordingly disposed of. -