1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 383 OF 2009 Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, a banking Company incorporated within the meaning of The Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having its Registered Office at 36-38A, Nariman Bhavan, 227 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 and branch office at 2nd floor, Dani Corporate Park, 158, CST Road, Kalina, Santacruz- East, Mumbai 400 098 and Vinay Bhavya Comlex, 5th Floor, 159-A, C.S.T. Road, Kalina, santacruz (E), Mumbai. ...Petitioner. Vs. 1. Neha Suresh Udia, Petrol Pump, Bhanpura Road, Garoth, Indore. 2. Suresh Chandra Udia, Petrol Pump, Bhanpura Road, Garoth, Indore. 3. Patel Motors Indore Private Ltd., 13/19, Pipliya Kumar Chauraha, Ring Road, Indore (MP) ...Respondents. 2 Mr. Nikhil Mehta with Mr. Rahul Mehta i/by Ms. Disha Karambar for the Petitioner. None for the Respondents. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 6th NOVEMBER, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT:- 1 The Petitioner has taken out this Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Arbitration Act). The Respondents not make the payment, though agreed as per the agreement, which also provides Arbitration Clause. There is no dispute about the jurisdiction. 2 None appeared for the Respondents, though served. Affidavit of service is part of the record. Considering the fact that there is no denial to the averments so made covering the default as well as the apprehension made, this court on 12th June, 2009, granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) except bracketed portion. 3 It is clear that Respondents are using the said vehicle without making due payments. The Petitioner has already invoked the Arbitration Proceeding and it is pending. In view of uncontroverted averments and considering the aspect of the depreciation of the machinery like vehicle and as all elements are available to grant relief under Order 40 Rule 1 of the 3 Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), I am inclined to grant this Petition in terms of prayer clause (aa) and (g). 4 The Petitioner has invoked and wants to utilize the Court Receiver’s agency to attach or to seize the vehicle, even out of State also. Thereafter, wants to sell the property by private agency. Therefore, it is necessary for them to pay the requisite percentage of fee/ Commission of the Court Receiver on the sale amount. 5 It is made clear that the Petitioner to undertake to pay the requisite percentage/ fee/ commission of the Court Receiver on the sale amount as per Rule 591 of the Bombay High Court, Original Side Rules. It is permitted to adjust the amount, if any, deposited by the Petitioner with the Court Receiver. 6 However, the liberty is granted to the Respondents to settle the matter and or furnish the security to the satisfaction of the Petitioner. The liberty is also granted to the Respondents to take appropriate pleas or defences before the Arbitral Tribunal. 7 Resultantly, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (aa) and (g) with liberty. No order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)