1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. ARBITRATION PETITION NO.363 OF 2009 L & T Finance Ltd. .... Petitioner vs Mr.Sanjay Bansilal Thakare & anr. .... Respondents Mr.Sanjay Anubhavne i/b. S.I. Joshi & Co. for the petitioner. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 30th September, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard finally. 1 The petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) as the respondents, inspite of agreement, failed to make the payment, based upon the Loan-cum-Hypothecation Agreement. 2 Considering the averments made and as there is no denial to the same, the fact remains that the respondents are defaulters. All the elements as contemplated under Order 40, Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) are available. In view of this, this Court has already granted interim protection in terms of prayer (c) on 9th June, 2009 which needs to be confirmed. 3 None appears for the respondents though served twice by private as well as court notice. 4 Resultantly, the petition is allowed in terms of prayers (a) and (c). No costs. 2 5 I do not deny the right of the respondents to contest and/or raise appropriate plea or defence before the Tribunal, if so constituted. The respondents are also at liberty to settle the matter and apply for modification of the order, if any, by furnishing security to the satisfaction of the petitioner. 6 The liberty is also granted to the petitioner to take police protection, if necessary. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)