arbpl1727.09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION (LODGING) NO. 1727 OF 2009 Tata Capital Limited ...Petitioner. Vs. Niranjan Marla ...Respondent. Mr. Nikhil Mehta i/by M/s. KMC Legal Venture for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 8TH FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C.- 1 Called twice, none present for the Respondent. An affidavit of service is already filed. 2 The Petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the Arbitration Act), as the Respondent committed consisting default in making payment towards the loan agreement having arbitration clause. 3 The Arbitrator has already been appointed. The Respondent is not attending the same. 4 The averments in the Petition has remained uncontroverted, therefore, considering the averments, as well as, apprehension as raised, arbpl1727.09 2 this Court has already granted prayer clause (c) on 14th December, 2009, and remained intact till this date. Therefore, I am inclined to grant prayer clause (d) also. The Respondent, thereby direct to furnish solvent security to the sum of Rs.4,94,358/- within a period of eight weeks and/or settle the matter. The liberty is also granted to raise appropriate plea/ defence before the Arbitral Tribunal, if any. 5 The petition is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (c) and (d). This order shall continue till the enforcement of the award under the Act. No order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)