1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 91 OF 2009 Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. .... Petitioner Vs. Shailesh Sharadchandra Shah & Anr. .... Respondents Ms. Raji Radhakrishnan i/by M/s. India Law Alliance for the Petitioner. Mr.Rupesh Bobade i/by Mr. Umesh Mankapure for the Respondents. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 7th August, 2009 P.C.: 1 Mr.Rupesh Bobade, learned counsel appeared for the Respondent. Apart from this, time was sought to make the payment of Rs.1,00,000/-, but in vain. The Respondent, thereafter, even not appeared in the Court, though served. Rule is already made returnable on 24th July, 2009, i.e. 7th August, 2009. Considering the averments made and as the averments remained uncontroverted and also considering the conduct of the Respondent, I am inclined to allow this Petition in terms of prayer clause (e) by deleting the bracket so put in the earlier order. 2 Resultantly, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (e). However, liberty is granted to the Respondent to settle the matter. I do not deny the right of the defence to raise appropriate evidence before the Arbitral Tribunal, if any. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)