1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.38 OF 2011 IN SUIT NO.3231 OF 2001 Sarvajanik Shikshan Sanstha. ...Petitioner vs. Alfred Ashtamkar, since deceased through his heirs & Lrs. & ors. ...Respondents --- Mr.Y.S.Jahagirdar, Sr.Advocate i/b. Rajesh S.Datar, for Petitioner. Mr.Chentan Kapadia with Mr.Rohan Cama & Mr.A.Mehta, Mr.H.S.Talekar i/b. Haresh Mehta & Co., for Respondent nos.3 & 4. Mr.Snehal Shah i/b. M/s.Bilawala & Co., for Respondent no.5. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, J. DATED: 22nd July,2011. 2 P.C.:- 1. This is a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, challenging the Award made by the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator has recorded finding of fact that the petitioner was not ready and willing to perform its part of the contract. The learned Arbitrator for arriving at that finding has relied on the documents on record and has also appreciated the oral evidence. Mainly in this petition this finding of fact has been challenged. What is further to be seen is that admittedly the agreement was for transfer of the school which was running with the school building. Admittedly, the school has been closed down with effect from 7.7.2005 and now there is no school. Therefore, it is impossible to grant decree of specific performance of the contract as agreed between the parties. Considering the limited jurisdiction conferred on this Court by Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, in my opinion, the finding of fact, which is recorded by the learned Arbitrator and which is based on the oral and 3 documentary evidence on record, cannot be disturbed. I do not see any reason to interfere with the Award. The petition is, therefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) ---