1 nms1118.10.sxw ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1118 OF 2010 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 987 OF 2009 Souren Chander Alimchandani ....Petitioner. Vs. Chander Rupchand Alimchandani ....Respondents. Mr. Pravin Samdhani, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kunal Mehta i/by M/s. Wadia Ghandy for the Petitioner. Mr. Haresh Jagtiani, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Siddhesh S. Bhole, Mr. Anil D’Souza and Ms. Nisha Srinivasan i/by Mr. Yashpal M. Jain for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. J.P. Sen, i/by Mr. Ravi Rattesar for Respondent No. 3. CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 16th December, 2010 PC:- In view of the rejection of Section 9 Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that the Motion No. 1118 of 2010 need to be heard separately. It has nothing to do with the decision even if, by the Arbitral Tribunal as constituted. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondents however, contended that this motion need to be heard after the decision/award by the Tribunal. However, at this stage, I am just adjourning this motion for hearing on 20th January, 2011. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)