1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRAITON PETITION NO.382 OF 2009 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., .. Petitioner V/s. Nagesh V. Kadam & Others. .. Respondents. Mr.Rahul Mehta i/b. Disha Karambar, for Petitioner CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED: 28th AUGUST, 2009. P.C. 1. None appeared for the Respondents. 2. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks time for filing reply/Affidavit. 3. Considering the averments made and as there is no denial to the averments, the case of the Petitioner is that, the Respondents are in default and have been using the vehicle without making due payment/installments. 3. This Court on 12th June, 2009, granted prayer clause (a) except bracketed portion. Now, as the case, as required under order 14 Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, srj/- 2 is made out, I am inclined to grant prayer clause (a) in full. Once, having granted prayer clause (a), there is nothing survived in this Petition. 4. In the result, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). I don t deny the rights of the Respondents to raise appropriate defence, if any, before the Arbitral Tribunal and also to settle the matter and/or to furnish the security. The liberty is also granted to the Petitioner to take Police Assistance, if the case is made out, for completion of prayer clause (a). 4. The Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), with no order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) srj/-