1 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1187 OF 2010 IN APPEAL (LODG) NO.251 OF 2010 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO.62 OF 2007 The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. ...Appellant. Vs. Akar Lables Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent. --- Mr.A.S.Vidyarthi, for Appellant. Mr.A.P.Wachasunder with R.K.Dave i/b. Mr.H.H.Trivedi, for Respondent. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & V.R.KINGAONKAR,JJ. DATED: 21st April, 2010 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides. Notice of motion is granted in terms of prayer clause (a). Notice of motion is disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) 2 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL (LODG) NO.251 OF 2010 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO.62 OF 2007 The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. ...Appellant. Vs. Akar Lables Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent. --- Mr.A.S.Vidyarthi, for Appellant. Mr.A.P.Wachasunder with R.K.Dave i/b. Mr.H.H.Trivedi, for Respondent. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & V.R.KINGAONKAR,JJ. DATED: 21st April, 2010 P.C.: 1. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides in detail. It appears that the only ground that was urged before the learned Single Judge was about the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator, and the learned Single Judge has found that the objection to the jurisdiction was not raised as 3 required by the provisions of Section 16(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act. The petitioner also did not participate in the proceedings before the learned Arbitrator after examining one witness by name Mr.Shrinivas. In our opinion, considering the limited jurisdiction of the learned Single Judge under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act to interfere with the Award made by the Arbitrator who is appointed by consent of the parties, no interference is called for in the order impugned. The appeal is, therefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.)