1 ao55.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Appeal from Order No. 55 of 2011 WITH Civil Application No. 76 of 2011 in AO 55/2011 Car Mart Pvt. Ltd. & ors. ...Appellant v/s. Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank ..Respondent Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Ms. Sonal Sagar Ghogre i/b Udwadia & Udeshi for the appellant. Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar with Ms. Sapna Rachure i/b. T.N. Tripathi & co. for the respondent. CORAM:- B.R. GAVAI, J DATED :- JANUARY 14, 2011. P.C. The Appellant challenges the ad-interim order thereby refusing the ad-interim relief for injunction restraining the Arbitrator from proceeding with arbitration proceedings. 2 ao55.11.sxw 2. It is informed at the bar that the notice of motion is kept on 27th January, 2011. Learned Counsel for Respondents undertakes to file reply to the notice of motion within a period of one week from today. 3. Shri Sancheti, the Learned Counsel prays that until the notice of motion is decided by the Learned City Civil Judge, the proceedings before the Learned Arbitrator should be stayed. It is further informed across the bar that the arbitration proceedings are themselves scheduled on 29th of this month. 4. In that view of the matter, I find that it will be in the interest of justice that the Learned City Civil Court is directed to decide the notice of motion itself on 27th January, 2011. 5. The Appeal is, therefore, disposed of. 6. Since the arbitration proceedings are scheduled after the date on which the notice of motion is scheduled, I do not find it necessary to consider the request of stay of the proceedings before the Learned Arbitrator. 3 ao55.11.sxw 7. Shri Sancheti has further apprehension that the Learned Trial Judge would be influenced by the observations made by him while refusing ad- interim order. I find that such apprehension is totally ill founded. The Learned Judge would be required to consider the matter on its own merits after considering the submissions made by both the parties before him. (B.R. GAVAI, J)