skt/- arbp.624.09.sxw ..1.. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 624 OF 2009 Reliance Capital Ltd. ...Petitioner. Vs. Lalit S. Sharma & Anr. ...Respondents. ..... Mr.Omar Khayam Shaikh i/by V. Salvi & Assoc. for the petitioner. None for the respondents. ..... CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 13th JANUARY, 2010. P.C.- 1. The petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( for short “the Arbitration Act”). As there is a consistent default and there is no reply/denial to the averments, and as this Court has already granted interim order in terms of prayer clause (c), while admitting the petition on 11th September 2009, is confirmed. The respondents neither appeared for settlement nor applied for modification. The default, so referred, as also remained uncontraverted. Therefore, in my view, the case is made out by the petitioner for confirmation of prayer clause (c), pending the skt/- arbp.624.09.sxw ..2.. arbitration petition, if any. However, the liberty is also granted to the respondents to apply for modification of the order and/or for settlement and/or to raise the appropriate plea before the Arbitral Tribunal. 2. The petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (c) with liberty. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)