AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.401 OF 2008 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO.79 OF 2008 [ARBITRATION PETITION (LODGING) NO.55 OF 2008] Lalitkumar V. Sanghavi. .... Appellant Vs. Dharamdas V. Sanghavi & Ors. .... Respondents Mr. Snehal Shah i/b Mr. Yatin Shah for the appellant. Mr. Shailesh Shah i/b Mr. K.P. Anilkumar for respondent 1. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS RESERVED : 3RD DECEMBER, 2008. DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED : 10TH DECEMBER, 2008. P.C. :- 1. The appellant is the original petitioner in Arbitration Petition (L) No.55 of 2008. The respondents are his relatives. Disputes AJN 2 arose between the appellant and the respondents over their business. It is not necessary to go into the nature of the dispute at this stage. The appellant's case is that the partnership firm stood dissolved on and from 14/2/2002 and the appellant invoked arbitration clause of the partnership agreement. The appellant filed Petition No.470 of 2002 under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, “the said Act”) for interim relief. On 31/10/2002, the Court Receiver was appointed as receiver of the assets of the partnership. The order appointing Court Receiver was confirmed in appeal and the special leave petition was dismissed. By a communication dated 29/10/2007, the arbitral tribunal stated that though the proceedings were pending from June, 2003 and meetings were convened between June, 2004 and 11/4/2007, the claimant took no interest in the matter. The arbitral tribunal, therefore, terminated the arbitral proceedings and all interim orders stood vacated. By the impugned order dated 7/2/2008, learned Single Judge dismissed the petition observing that the object of an interim measure of protection under Section 9 of the said Act is to enable the court to pass an appropriate order in aid of arbitral proceedings. He further observed that the arbitral tribunal having come to the conclusion that the appellant/petitioner AJN 3 had not taken any interest to pursue the arbitral proceedings, the exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 9 of the said Act was not warranted. The said order is challenged in this appeal. 2. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant. He submitted that the observations of the arbitral tribunal that the appellant took no interest in the proceedings, is factually incorrect. He submitted that the appellant had paid the fees of the arbitrators and had filed his statement of claim. He had called for an urgent meeting to sort out the matter. However, without giving the appellant any opportunity to put forward his case, the arbitral tribunal terminated the arbitral proceedings. Learned counsel submitted that, in fact, it was respondent 1 who was non- cooperative. He further submitted that, in any case, termination of the arbitral proceedings is without going to the merits of the case and, therefore, the appellant is required to be protected. Learned counsel submitted that, therefore, the impugned order be set aside and the appointment of the Court Receiver be continued. 3. We are informed that the appellant has filed a petition praying for constitution of a new arbitral tribunal. In view of that and in the AJN 4 circumstances of the case, in our opinion, no interference is warranted with the impugned judgment and order. If the new arbitral tribunal is constituted, it will be open for the appellant to renew his prayer for appointment of the Court Receiver. Needless to say that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. If the appellant makes a prayer for appointment of the Court Receiver, that prayer will be considered independently and in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant apprehends that till the arbitral tribunal is constituted, it is possible that the respondents would sell the properties involved in the dispute. We have not examined whether this apprehension is genuine or not. Learned counsel for respondent 1 has fairly made a statement that, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of respondent 1, for a period of three months from today, respondent 1 will stay his hands and not sell, alienate, encumber or deal with or create any third party interest in the disputed property or any part thereof. This statement is accepted. All contentions of both parties are kept open. The appeal is disposed of in the aforestated terms. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] AJN 5 [K.K. TATED, J.]