1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. ARBITRATION ARBITRATION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.103 OF 2009 PETITION NO.103 OF 2009 PETITION NO.103 OF 2009 M/s.Madra Construction Petitioner vs. M/s.Indian Oil Tanking Ltd. & anr. Respondents Ms.Shilpa Kapil for the petitioners. CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. DATED : 21st April, 2009 P.C. The petitioners have invoked Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) and basically prayed to terminate the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal and to appoint a new Arbitrator in place of respondent no.2. 2. Admittedly, the petitioners have raised various objections by letter dated 24.11.2008 alleging bias referring to Sections 13 and 14 of the Act as the matter is pending before respondent no.2. According to the petitioners, respondent no.1 has not replied to this letter. Respondent no.2, till this date, even not decided this objection and it is still pending. 3. It is desirable that if such objections are raised, the Arbitral Tribunal need to adjudicate/decide the same 2 as early as possible to avoid further complication and delay in the matter. 4. However, at this stage, without observing anything on the merits of the objection raised, the present petition as filed is premature and even otherwise the relief as prayed cannot be granted in the present facts and circumstances of the case. 5. In view of above, the petition is dismissed by keeping all points open. The petitioners are at liberty to file additional material or facts to justify their case of bias/objection. No costs. [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.] V. MOHTA,J.] V. MOHTA,J.]