IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.337 OF 2009 IN ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.573 OF 2009 M/s.Indorama Synthetics (I) Ltd. ...Appellants Versus M/s.Chhabria Polyester Corporation & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Pradeep Sancheti i/b Mr.Mangesh D.Patel for Appellants. Mr.Jimmy Avasia with Ms.Manorama Mohanty & Mr.D.S.Patil i/b S.K.Srivastava & Co. for Respondents. ...... CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATED : AUGUST 12, 2009. P.C. : 1. The present Appeal is directed against the order dated 6th July 2009 passed by the learned Single Judge on a Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. In the impugned order, the learned Single Judge held that this Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the Petition and granted liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants submits that he has no intention to challenge the order on merits, provided, the Respondents in the Appeal agree to the jurisdiction of Delhi Court on the premise that a part of the cause of action has arisen at Delhi. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents submits that part of cause of action has arisen at Delhi. Keeping in view the terms and conditions printed at the back of the invoice which give jurisdiction to Delhi Court, their stand is clear that Delhi Court has jurisdiction. 3. In view of the above, the Appeal is not pressed by the learned Counsel for the Appellants. We, while disposing of the Appeal as not pressed, also direct that the Petition under Section 9 be returned to the Appellants for presentation before the Court of competent jurisdiction. 4. Petition may be returned to the Appellants without any further delay. 5. Appeal disposed of on the above terms. 6. Counsel for the Appellants undertakes to remove office objections, if any, within one week from today. CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.