1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 16 OF 2009 Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. ...Petitioners. Vs. Duryodhan Sopan Kamble & 2 ors. ...Respondents. Ms. Priya Crasto or the Petitioner. None for the Respondent. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 10th March, 2010. P.C.- 1 None appeared for the respondents. 2 Considering the fact that there is no denial to the averments made in the petition and it also means that there is no denial to the amount due and payable by the respondents and as the vehicle is involved, this Court has already granted/permitted the petitioners to sell the vehicle through the Receiver. However, by Chamber summons, the petitioner sought permission to sell the same through Private Treaty. This Court has permitted/granted the said chambers. 3 In view of this, I am inclined to allow this Petition in terms of prayer (c). It is made clear that the petitioners shall pay the requisite charges and/or fees of the Receiver though the prayer is to sell the vehicle through 2 the Private Treaty. 4 The Petition is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer (c). No costs. 5 All points are kept open to be agitated before the Arbitral Tribunal. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)