1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.760 OF 2009 Citifinancial Consumer Finance India Ltd. .. Petitioner -versus Mukesh Shah and anr .. Respondents. Mr. M. B. Kale i/b Mohit Gadkari & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Deshpande for the respondent. CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED: 15th February, 2010 P.C. 1. In this petition, the petitioner has invoked section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, l996 (for short called as "the Act") and thereby sought interim security protection pending arbitration proceeding which is going on at Delhi in view of the agreement clause 10.7(h), which is reproduced below: “10.7(h) In the event of any dispute or differences arising under this Agreement including any dispute as to any amount outstanding, the real meaning or purport hereof (“Dispute”), such dispute shall be finally resolved by arbitration. Such arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, l996 or any amendment or reenactment 2 thereof by a single arbitrator to be appointed by the Lender. The venue of arbitration shall be at New Delhi and the arbitration shall be conducted in English language” 2. There is no dispute about the loan granted in question ie Home Loan agreement taken place and executed at Mumbai and the amount was disbursed in Mumbai as the property is also falling within the ambit of this Court jurisdiction. The contention that in view of the fact that the arbitrator is at Delhi and, therefore, this Court has no jurisdiction has no force. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there is no prayer clause of exclusive jurisdiction either at Mumbai or at Delhi. In view of this peculiar situation, the submission that this Court has no jurisdiction to pass interim order or protection pending arbitration has no force especially in absence of any specific or exclusive clause of jurisdiction. 4. The fact of cause of action is not in dispute. In the present facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of specific bar and/or agreement clause and as there is arbitration clause between the parties and there exist dispute between the parties, this Court has already granted ad interim protection in terms of prayer clause (c) on 9th October,2009; after considering averments made and as there is default in making due payment as averred. 3 5. The submission with regard to the amount so involved and calculation so raised can be agitated before the Arbitrator Tribunal. All points are kept open. 6. However, considering the above admitted position and as there is default and as claims contemplated under section 9 of the Act, all ingredients as required under Order 39 rule (l) of Civil Procedure Code, are made out for ad interim protection which is already granted in terms of prayer clause (c) with liberty. Liberty is granted to respondent to send proposal and/or apply for settlement if any and to raise appropriate plea/defences before the Arbitrator. 7. The petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of prayer clause (c) only. No order as to costs. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)