1 Arb Apln No. 08 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 08 OF 2010 1. Mahavirchand s/o Suganchand Deoda, Aged 61 years, Occupation Business, R/o Khinvsara Park, Garkheda Area, Aurangabad. 2. Dharmendra s/o Mahavirchand Deoda, Aged 35 years, Occ. Business, R/o as above. Applicants V E R S U S 1. Ashaykumar s/o Bhavarsing Parakh, Aged 26 years, Occ. Business, R/o 10/11, Manik Towers Viraj Colony, Canada Corner, Nasik, through constituted Power of attorney holder - Bhavarsing s/o Vardhaman Parakh, Aged 63 years, Occ. Business, R/o 10/11, Manik Towers, Viraj Colony, Canada Corner, Nasik. 2. Parasmal s/o Mohanlal Dungarwal, Aged 71 years, Occ. Business, R/o House No. 10/2/172 'Vrushab Kunj' Road No. 1, West Maradpalli, Secunderabad - 500026 (Andhra Pradesh), 3. Premchand s/o Sughanchand Deoda, Aged 64 years, Occ. Legal Practitioner, R/o 'M/s. Sheetal Wears' Besides 'M/s. Paras' Raymond Retail Shop, Adalat Road, Aurangabad. 4. Sou Surekha w/o Nemichand Deoda, Aged 49 years, Occ. Household, R/o. 'M/s. Sugan' Aurangpura, Aurangabad. 5. Sou. Jayshreebai w/o Rajendrakumar Deoda, Aged 53 years, Occ. Household, resident of 12, Samrat Colony, West Marradpalli Secunderabad - 500026 (A.P.) Respondents 2 Arb Apln No. 08 of 2010 6. Smt. Veenadevi w/o Gautamchand Jain, Aged 47 years, Occ. Household and Business, Resident of House No. 10/2/172 'Vrushab Kunj' Road No. 1 West Maradpalli, Secunderabad - 500026 (A.P.) 7. Sanjay s/o Rameshchand Lunawat, Age 38 years, Occ. Business, R/o. B-36, Bhokardan Road, Jalna. 8. ‘M/s. Paras’ Raymond Retail Shop a Partnership Firm, Adalat Road, Aurangabad. Mr. D.V. Soman, Advocate for the applicants Mr. S.G. Laddha with Mr. D.S. Manorkar, Advocates for respondent No.1 Mr. Rajendra M. Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.2, 5 and 6 CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 3rd March, 2011 ORAL ORDER : 1. This application is filed against the order dated 5th July, 2010, rejecting the applicants' plea raised before the Panel of Arbitrators asserting that the panel had exceeded the scope of its authority. Such plea can be raised under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. However, only if such plea is allowed, such order is made appellable under Section 37 of the Act. Such plea if rejected, the party aggrieved is expected to go through the arbitral proceeding, and in case they suffer due to the final Award, they may challenge the Award under Section 34 of the Act. Here the applicants are required to attend the arbitral proceedings till it comes to an end. In case the Award goes against the applicants, all points raised even through this application are kept open. In view this, Arbitration Application stands dismissed. 3 Arb Apln No. 08 of 2010 2. In view of dismissal of Arbitration Proceeding, Civil Applications No.12663 of 2010 and 2660 of 2011 stand disposed of. ( A.V. NIRGUDE, J. ) SRM/arbapln/8/10/3/3/11