: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION NO.420 OF 2008 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.611 OF 2005 Compulink Systems Limited ...Applicant V/s. Millenium Engineers and Contractors . Private Limited ...Respondent Mr.Amit Vyas with Ms.Nikita Ajwani i/b Rajani & Associates for the applicant Mr.Vishwajeet Sawant for the respondent CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 11TH APRIL, 2008 DATE : 11TH APRIL, 2008 DATE : 11TH APRIL, 2008 P.C : P.C : P.C : 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. This application has been made by the respondent in Company Petition No.611 of 2005. By an order dated 3.3.06, the said Company Petition was disposed of in terms of the Consent Terms. Under the said Consent Terms, the parties mutually agreed to refer to arbitration certain claims which are incorporated in the consent terms. The present applicant agreed to furnish a security in the sum of Rs.20.00 lakhs by way of bank guarantee with the office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay. Under the Consent Terms, the : 2 : applicants agreed to keep alive and valid the said bank guarantee during the arbitral proceedings. 2. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that only on the basis of objection raised by the respondent company, the arbitrator appointed under the Consent Terms has submitted resignation and therefore, the arbitral proceedings cannot proceed further. He submitted that this situation is brought about by the respondent though the arbitrator was named under the Consent Terms. He therefore, submitted that the applicant is under no obligation to keep the bank guarantee valid. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that an application has been filed under the provisions of section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the respondent for appointment of an Arbitrator which is pending in this court. He, therefore, submitted that the prayer made in this application cannot be granted. 4. The fact remains that the Arbitrator appointed under the Consent Terms has tendered his resignation. Now an application has been made for the appointment of a new Arbitrator. The new Arbitrator is bound to : 3 : be appointed in the near future. Under the Consent Terms, the parties have agreed to refer certain disputes to Arbitration and the applicant has agreed to keep valid the bank guarantee in the sum of Rs.20 lakhs during the arbitration proceedings. 5. In view of pendency of the application made by the respondent, as of today, no case is made out for grant of relief which is claimed in this application. Accordingly, application is rejected. 6. In case there is any delay in furnishing bank guarantee, the office will accept the bank guarantee provided it is furnished within a period of three weeks from today. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]