1 wpl17.11.sxw ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (LODGING) NO. 17 OF 2011 M/s. Vaidhei Akash Housing Pvt. Ltd. .....Petitioner Vs. The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Board, & Anr. ......Respondents. Mr. Uday P. Warunjikar with Mr. Kiran Kulkarni for the Petitioner. Mr. G.W. Mattos, AGP for Respondent No.1. Dr. Virendra Tulzapurkar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A.S. Desai for Respondent No.2. Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Simil Purohit, Ms. Anooja Menon and Ms. Vedangi Tulzapurkar i/by M/s. Wadia Ghandy & Co. for Rustomjee Realty Pvt. Ltd.-proposed intervenor. CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD AND ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 10, 2011. P.C.: The Petitioner had entered into an agreement on 31 December 2005 for development with ten societies which have been amalgamated with the Second Respondent. The Petitioner assigned rights in respect of the free sale component on 4 April 2007 in favour of Rustomjee Reality Private Limited. The agreement with the Petitioner was terminated by the Second Respondent on 16 April 2010. 2 wpl17.11.sxw ssm 2 The Court has been informed that on 21 April 2010, the Petitioner has already invoked its right under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. There is evidently a civil dispute between the Petitioner and the Second Respondent in which the parties can espouse remedies, in accordance with law. Hence, the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not warranted. The Petition is dismissed, only on this ground. 3 The Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.)