1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 100 OF 2009 WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 271 OF 2009 Fashion Television India Private Ltd. ...Petitioner. Vs. M/s. Business Inroads & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. Abhay Jadeja i/by M/s. Crawford Bayley & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr. Manish Saurastri i/by M/s. Krishna & Saurastri Associates for Respondent No.1. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 27th JULY, 2009. P.C.- 1 In a Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act), the parties have amicably settled the whole dispute arising out of the Franchisee Agreement dated 15th January, 2008, and accordingly filed the consent terms dated 27th July, 2009 signed by the Petitioner and Respondent No.1 only and the respective advocates. Respondent No.2 who is the owner, as per the agreement in question, has not signed this consent terms. The parties have no objection with regard to the signatures and authorization of signatories and identification of the same. Both the authorized signatories are present in the Court. The consent terms is 2 taken on record and marked “X”. The undertakings so reflected and agreed, are accepted by the parties. The Court has also accepted the same with regard to the Petitioner and Respondent No.1 only. As the basic relief is sought and contemplated only against Respondent No.1, I am inclined to accept this consent Terms subject to the objection, if any, by Respondent No.2. 2 The Petition is disposed of accordingly with liberty to Respondent No.2, if any. 3 In view of above, the Chamber Summons is also disposed of. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)