1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.993 OF 2009 Pynadath Varghese Thomas .. Petitioner -versus G and T Oilfield and Offshore Services Pvt. Ltd .. Respondents Mr. Ajay Panicker for the Petitioner. Mr. Viraj Tulzapurkar, Senior counsel with Ethel Pereira i/b Desai for the respondent. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED: 22nd February, 2010 P.C. 1. The petitioner has invoked section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, l996 (for short called as "Arbitration Act"). There is arbitration clause between the parties. 2. Considering the averments made in para 29, on 5th December 2009, the Court has granted ad interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) by observing that the petitioner has submitted a bill which is of Rs.72 lacs and odd and the balance is about Rs.50 lacs. 3. The learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the respondent, however, strongly resisted the averments so made in para 29 and submitted that there is no case made out. In the reply 2 filed by the respondent they have specifically denied that ‘the promoters of respondent company are planning to sell the factory or assets as alleged or at all”. The apprehension so raised is not correct specially for want of material to substantiate the same. The averments are quite vague. 4. The second contention is that the petitioner has accepted Rs.22 lacs as it was made towards the full and final settlement. However, the petitioner has denied the same that such acceptance was towards full and final settlement. Admittedly, the petitioner has not refunded that amount, but a winding up proceeding as filed in Delhi was withdrawn. 5. Finally, the effect of acceptance of said amount in proceedings and secondly, the acceptance itself debar the petitioner from invoking the arbitration clause are the issues which in my view, the Arbitrator Tribunal will have to decide finally. 6. However, considering the above facts I am of the view that as there is no case made out by the petitioner for any interim relief as sought. Keeping all the points open, present petition is dismissed. The Ad interim order already granted is vacated, however, it is subject to liberty. No costs. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)