1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 202 OF 2009 Tata Capital Ltd. ...Petitioners. Vs. Narendra M. Sakharkar & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. S.B. Gore i/by R.M. Hailkar, Advocate for the Petitioners. None present for the Respondents. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 11TH JUNE, 2009. P.C.- 1. The petitioner based upon the personal loan agreement filed this petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to attach the property on the foundation that the respondents are the owner of the property. There are no details available on record to justify the same except that the application for personal loan indicates that the property is self owned property of the respondents. There are no supporting documents on record. The respondent has filed his reply and stated as under : SKT/- 2 “With reference to para 20 I say the Petitioners are not entitled to the any of the prayers prayed by them. I further say that I do not own property bearing no. 15th Meghji Building, 102, Mazgaon Road, Chapsi Marg, Next to Wallance Floor Till, Mazgaon, Mumbai-400 009 therefore question of restraining me from disposing off, selling, alienating, transferring or creating any encumbrances, charges or third party interest in respect of same does not arise. In the facts and circumstances stated herein Receiver cannot appointed in respect of the aforesaid property.” 2. In view of this, therefore, at this stage, there is no question of any relief as prayed. However, the liberty is granted to the petitioners to apply again with details to attach the property in question or any immovable property of respondents. The Arbitration petition is also pending. The liberty is therefore, granted to apply for appropriate relief. 3. Petition is dismissed accordingly. 4. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) SKT/-