1 23.arbp.168.08=100.08.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION skt ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 168 OF 2008 Union Of India Through Chief Engineer ... Petitioner Vs. M/s.Girish Enterprises ... Respondent ...... Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Petitioner. Mr.R.D.Dhanuka a/w. Ms.Shilpa Kapil for the Respondent. ...... AND ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 100 OF 2008 M/s.Girish Enterprises ... Petitioner Vs. Union Of India Through Chief Engineer & Ors. ... Respondents ...... Mr.R.D.Dhanuka a/w. Ms.Shilpa Kapil for the Petitioner. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Respondents. ..... CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : OCTOBER 6th, 2010. P.C. 1 These are the petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the award made by the Arbitral Tribunal. 2 23.arbp.168.08=100.08.sxw 2 The parties do not insist on reasons for the following order : (i) The petition is allowed and the award is set aside. The General Manager (Central Railway) shall appoint a fresh Arbitral Tribunal in accordance with the clause of the arbitration agreement, who shall pass a fresh award after hearing the parties. (ii) The fresh Arbitral Tribunal will be entitled to refer to the existing record and shall be entitled to permit the parties to file fresh documents or pleadings if the Arbitral Tribunal thinks fit. 3 Both the petitions are disposed of with no order as to costs. -