arbp1095-10.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.1095 OF 2010 Nutan Chandrakant Somaiya & Anr. .. Petitioners Versus Moneyline Credit Ltd. .. Respondent Ms.Sapna Rachure i/b. T.N.Tripathi & Co. for petitioners CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 9th FEBRUARY 2011. P.C.: 1] Heard Mr.Tripathi, learned Advocate for petitioner. 2] Perused the award. There is no substance in the contention of the petitioner that the award is violative of principles of natural justice. It is not that every ex parte award violates these principles because ultimately the arbitrator has to act in consonance with equity, fairness and justice. If adequate opportunity to defend the claim is given by the Arbitrator and repeated notices to remain present are not responded by the respondent before the Tribunal, then, the Arbitral Tribunal can always proceed ex parte. The Tribunal can then record a finding that the respondent is deliberately keeping away from the proceedings. The intent is to delay the matter. Precisely this is what has transpired in this case. The tribunal as a matter of record pointed out that the petitioner remained absent on first two dates. On the third date, the tribunal was in some arbp1095-10.doc 2 difficulty. Therefore, the matter was adjourned to 3rd March 2010. Petitioner attended the proceedings and sought an adjournment till 17th March 2010 for filing defence statement. On 17th March 2010, defence statement was not filed but the Advocate for petitioner sought time to do so. In the interest of justice, time was granted till 31st March 2010. On 31st March 2010, an application for adjournment was made on the ground of illness of the Advocate and the matter was adjourned to 5th April 2010. 3] From 30th December 2009 till 5th April 2010 no defence statement came to be filed. If in such circumstances, the Tribunal proceeds ex parte and on scrutiny and verification of the claim awards the amount as prayed, I do not see how the Tribunal can be faulted for proceeding ex parte. The award cannot be termed as violative of the principles of natural justice and public policy. The claim is undisputed and, therefore, rightly came to be awarded. Even the complaint that the interest rate is exceeding the Agreed rate cannot be entertained for the first time before me. In such circumstances, there is no merit in this petition and it is dismissed accordingly. No costs. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)