1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. ARBITRATION PETITION NO.533 OF 2009 Tata Capital Limited .... Petitioner vs Suresh Kanhayalal Seth .... Respondent Mr.Nikhil Mehta i/b. KMC Legal Venture for the petitioner. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 2nd September, 2009 JUDGMENT: 1 The petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) as the respondents failed to make regular payment towards personal loan. 2 Mr.Suresh K. Seth, the sole respondent appears and submits that because of financial problem or even otherwise, he has no money to pay any instalment. However, there is no dispute about the agreements well as the defaults. 3 Affidavit of service dated 02.09.2009 is taken on record, even after admission of the matter. 3 Considering the above undisputed position on record read with the principles as contemplated under Order 40 of Code of Civil Procedure read with 2 Order 38, Rule 5 of CPC and as all elements are available, I am inclined to grant ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (b). It is made clear that this order shall continue till such time as the Award which may be passed and is enforced under Section 36 of the Act. 4 However, in view of above, I am inclined to grant one more opportunity to the respondent to settle the dispute with the petitioner. 5 I do not deny the rights of the respondents to raise appropriate pleas or defence before the Arbitral Tribunal, if any constituted. 6 The petition is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer (b) only. However, six weeks time is granted to comply with the same. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)