- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.755 OF 2007 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO.396 OF 2007 Zoom Trade & Realty Limited. .. Appellant. (Org.Petitioner) Vs. M/s.Sai Lee Developers & Co. & Others. .. Respondents (Org.Respondents) -- S/Shri Janak Dwarkadas, Sr.Counsel, with D.D.Madon, Sr.Counsel, Snehal Shah, Kiran Mohite and Aniruddha Joshi i/b Nivit Srivastava for the Appellant. Ms Rajani Iyer, Sr.Counsel, i/b Rohit Shetty, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 to 3. S/Shri Anil Anturkar with Sachin Mhatre, Advocates for the Respondent No.4. -- CORAM : SRI R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR & SRI A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ DATED : 24TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. 1. Heard. By consent, Admit. Heard forthwith. The learned advocates for the parties waive service. 2. By consent, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh hearing of - 2 - the Arbitration Petition No.396 of 2007 and to pass a reasoned order. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on any of the points sought to be raised in the matter and all the points are kept open. 3. Considering the nature of controversy and in the facts and circumstances of the case, in our considered opinion, the hearing of the matters needs to be expedited and to be disposed of by time-bound period. We, therefore, request the learned Single Judge to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible after hearing the parties and possibly on or before 31st July, 2008. 4. Meanwhile, the parties are required to maintain status quo in relation to the property in question except the area which is said to be utilised for PAP Building in Plot No.III and the area which is delineated by red colour stripes on the copy of the site plan which is found at page no.301 of the paper book of this appeal and which is marked as Exhibit "X" for identification. The development in the excluded area in terms of the said Exhibit "X" for identification shall be without prejudice to the rights of the parties. The respondent Nos. 1 to 4 - 3 - accordingly should file undertaking in that regard before the learned Single Judge. 5. Liberty to the parties to mention the matter before the learned Single Judge to enable him to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. 6. The appeal accordingly stands disposed of. ( R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J ) ( A.V.NIRGUDE, J )