1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE APPEAL NO. 645 OF 2004 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 63 OF 2002 M/s.Renuka Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Appellants vs. 1.Mr.Mahendra J. Vora & ors. Respondents Mr.Shyan Diwan i/b. M/s.Vasant & Co. for the appellants. Mr.E.P. Bharucha, senior counsel with Mr.J.P.Sen iu/b. Mr.G.R. Mehta for the respondents. CORAM : R. M. LODHA & J.P. DEVADHAR,JJ. DATED : 15th October 2004 P.C. After having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned senior counsel for the respondents, we are satisfied that no interference is called for in the impugned order, particularly because it was admitted case of the present appellants (respondents therein) before the learned Single Judge that they moved the arbitrator not for clarification of the award but rather implementation of the award. 2. Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. However, we clarify that impugned order shall not be 2 construed to mean that the sole arbitrator may not act as per the consent terms (Annexure A). To that extent, his role continues. (R.M. (R.M. (R.M. LODHA,J.) LODHA,J.) LODHA,J.) (J.P. (J.P. (J.P. DEVADHAR,J.) DEVADHAR,J.) DEVADHAR,J.)