1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION (LODGING)NO.460 OF 2009 Mukesh Ramchand Khanna ...Petitioner Vs. Surendra K. Parashar & 2 ors. ...Respondents Ms.Seema Gupta i/b.Mr.A.M.Saraogi for the Petitioner. Mr.R.R.Varma for respondent no.1. Ms.Jyotsana N. Pandhi for respondent no.2. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 9TH JUNE, 2009. P.C.- 1 In a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act), the contesting parties i.e. The petitioner and respondent no.1 have arrived at settlement and accordingly signed the Consent Term dated 9th June, 2009. It is signed by the petitioner and respondent no.1 and their respective Advocates. As the parties, based upon their agreement 2 including arbitration agreement, by this consent terms have settled all their disputes. The consent terms are taken on record and marked “X” for identification purpose. The statement is made by both the learned counsel that this agreement is well within the frame work of law and the record/contract. The undertakings given in paragraphs 2 to 5 and 13 are accepted by the parties and the Court also. 2 It is made clear that the petitioner is not claiming any relief against respondents 2 and 3 and respondents 2 and 3 are not even parties to the arbitration clause in the agreement between the petitioner and respondent no.1. 3 The petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of Consent Terms dated 9th June, 2009. No costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)