1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 246 OF 2009 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. .... Petitioner vs Vijay Prakash Rai & anr. .... Respondents Mr.Nikhil Mehta with Mr.Rahul Mehta i/b. Disha Karambar for the petitioner. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE : 10th September, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1 Though the petitioner tried to serve by private as well as the court notice, the respondents refused to accept the same. Affidavit of service is filed accordingly on record. 2 As the respondents failed to make the due payments, the petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) and as the averments made in the petition remained un-controverted, this Court on 22.04.2009, therefore, has granted prayer (c) to secure the amount. 3 None appeared for the respondents today again. 4 As the averments remained uncontroverted and as all elements are available to grant protection/measure/security in favour of the petitioner, therefore, I am inclined to grant prayer (a) to the extent of furnishing solvent security in the entire amount of Rs.2,70,115/- within six weeks. 5 The interim order already granted in terms of prayer (c) stands confirmed. 2 6 However, liberty is granted to the respondents to settle the matter. 7 The liberty is also granted to the respondents to raise appropriate pleas or defences before the Tribunal, if constituted. 8 It is made clear that this order will continue until the Award is enforced under Section 36 of the Act. 9 The Petition is accordingly allowed in terms of prayers (a) and (c) with liberty. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)