1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.55 OF 2008 Lalitkumar Vanmalidas Sanghavi. ...Petitioner. Vs. Dharamdas Vanmalidas Sanghavi & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr.Yatin R.Shah for the Petitioner. Mr.Shailesh Shah with Mr. P.N. Ganwani i/b. Mr. K.P. Anilkumar for the Respondents. ..... CORAM :DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. February 7, 2008. P.C.: By an order dated 31st October 2002, the Court Receiver was appointed as Receiver of the assets of the partnership in a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. After the order of the Court, the arbitral Tribunal was constituted and proceedings took place in arbitration. The order appointing Receiver was confirmed in appeal and the Special Leave Petition was dismissed. By a communication dated 29th October 2007, the arbitral Tribunal has stated that though the proceedings were pending from June 2003 and meetings were convened between June 2004 and 11th 2 April 2007, the Claimant took no interest in the matter. The arbitral proceedings have consequently been terminated by the arbitral Tribunal and all interim orders had been vacated. The First Respondent has taken out a Notice of Motion before the Learned Single Judge in the Arbitration Petition for the discharge of the Receiver. The Notice of Motion (Notice of Motion 4515 of 2007 in Arbitration Petition 470 of 2002) is pending. In the meantime, a fresh Arbitration Petition under Section 9 has been instituted, seeking the appointment of a Receiver. The Petitioner claims to have moved a fresh petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in the meantime, after the order of the arbitral Tribunal dated 29th October 2007 terminating the arbitral proceedings. Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, empowers the Court before the commencement of arbitral proceedings, during the arbitral proceedings and at any time after the making of the arbitral award, but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36, to issue an interim measure of protection. The order under Section 9 is in aid of arbitral proceedings. Arbitral proceedings 3 were terminated on 29th October 2007 on the ground that the Petitioner, who was the claimant in the arbitration, had not taken any interest in the matter. This order continues to hold the field. The object of an interim measure of protection under Section 9 is to enable the Court to pass an appropriate order in aid of arbitral proceedings. The arbitral Tribunal having come to the conclusion that the Petitioner herein, had not taken any interest to pursue the arbitral proceedings, the exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 9 would not be warranted. The Petition is accordingly dismissed. .....