1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. ARBITRATION PETITION NO.537 OF 2009 Tata Capital Limited .... Petitioner vs Abu Ghanim Niyaz Ahmed Azmi .... Respondent Mr.Nikhil Mehta i/b. KMC Legal Venture for the petitioner. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 2nd September, 2009 JUDGMENT: 1 The petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) as the respondents failed to make regular payment towards personal loan. The respondent’s post-dated cheques were also bounced. There is a clear case of non-payment of instalments and the same remained un- controverted till this date. 2 Though served, the respondents failed to appear till this date. Affidavit of service dated 02.09.2009 is taken on record, even after admission of the matter. 3 Considering the above undisputed position on record read with the principles as contemplated under Order 40 of Code of Civil Procedure read with Order 38, Rule 5 of CPC and as all elements are available, I am inclined to grant ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (b). It is made clear that this order shall 2 continue till such time as the Award which may be passed and is enforced under Section 36 of the Act. 4 The liberty is granted to the respondents to settle the matter. 5 I do not deny the rights of the respondents to raise appropriate pleas or defence before the Arbitral Tribunal, if any constituted. 6 The petition is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer (b) only. However, six weeks time is granted to comply with the same. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)