IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL APPEAL APPEAL NO. 13 OF 2006 NO. 13 OF 2006 NO. 13 OF 2006 IN IN IN ARBITRATION ARBITRATION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 136 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 136 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 136 OF 2005 IN IN IN AWARD AWARD AWARD NO. 10 OF 2004 NO. 10 OF 2004 NO. 10 OF 2004 Hyndai Corporation. ] .. Appellants (Ori.Petnr.) Versus Oil & Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd. ] .. Respondents (Ori.Respdts.) Mr. Ketan Parekh with Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar and Ms. Nandini Gidwaney i/b M/s. Kanga & Co. for the appellants. Mr. M.K. Banerjee, Attorney General with Mr. D.R. Zaiwala, Mr. V.J. Pereira and Mr. F.U. Lakdawala i/b M/s. Divya Shah & Associates for the respondents. CORAM: R.M. LODHA & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATED: 14TH FEBRUARY, 2006 P.C. : . Heard Mr. Ketan Parekh, the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Attorney General for the respondents. 2. The controversy raised in the Appeal is wholly and squarely concluded by the Division Bench judgment of : 2 : this Court in the case of Sumitomo Heavy Industries Sumitomo Heavy Industries Sumitomo Heavy Industries Limited Limited Limited Vs. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited Vs. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited Vs. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited (Appeal No.126 of 2000) decided on 19th December, 2001. It is not in dispute that the relevant clauses of the contract in the present case and in the case of Sumitomo Heavy Industries Limited are similar. 3. In view thereof, we find no justifiable ground to interfere in the Appeal. 4. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Sd/- [R.M. [R.M. [R.M. LODHA, J.] LODHA, J.] LODHA, J.] Sd/- [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.] [srpasha@hc]