1 pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Arbitration Petition No.43 of 2009 Mohammed Qasim Abdul Sattar .. Petitioner v/s. Niyaz Ahmed Kalab Hussain & Ors.. ..Respondents Mr.A.A.Siddiqui for the Petitioner Mr.Mohammed Akram Bastiri for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 Mr.M.S.Kadu for Respondent No.4 to 7 Mr.Matin Shaikh for the Respondent No.10 Mr.A. Solkar for Respondent Nos.11 CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 25th March, 2010 P.C. : 1. Petitioner claims that he is a partner is respect of a firm by name M/s. Popular Bakery and according to him the dispute exists as regards running the bakery and sharing profits. As of today, respondent nos.1 to 3 have closed the bakery business and they are selling some articles of day to day need. The petitioner has filed this petition so as to seek interim reliefs more particularly set out in the petition, particularly relief as regards appointment 2 of Receiver and other reliefs are in regard to an order of injunction so as to not to create any third party rights etc. 2. I am informed that the petitioner has filed the petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for appointment of Arbitrator. 3. After having heard learned Advocates on both sides, the moot question to be decided is whether the petitioner is a partner in the firm namely M/s. Popular Bakery. In my view, it would be in the interest of both the parties if this question is not answered while deciding the present petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, particularly, when the Arbitrator is yet to be appointed. 4. In my view, to protect the interest of both the parties, it would be proper if the respondent nos.1 to 3 are restrained from creating third part rights in respect of the premises as regards to the bakery premises mentioned in the body of the petition. They can also be restrained from parting from possession of the Bakery premises. The Court is also informed that as of today, they are running the shop of selling some day to day articles. At this juncture, there is no need to restrain the respondent 3 nos.1 to 3 from running the said business. Hence they can carry on with the said business of selling day to day articles. In my view, it would be proper if an order of injunction is passed against the respondent nos.1 to 3 till the Arbitration Petition Under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Petition is decided and one month thereafter. Hence the petition is disposed of by passing following orders. ORDER i) Till the disposal of the Arbitration Petition filed by the petitioner under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act and 30 days thereafter, the respondent nos.1 to 3 are restrained from creating third party rights in regard to the premises described in the petition as bakery premises. They are also restrained from parting with possession with regard to the bakery premises. ii) It is made clear that respondent nos.1 t o 3 are free to run the shop wherein they are selling various articles. iii)Merits of the matter are left open. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to seek appropriate reliefs after Arbitrator is appointed. 4 iv) Petition stands disposed of in above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]