1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 407 OF 2009 Maytas Infra Limited ...Petitioner. Vs. Utility Energytech & Engineers Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent. Mr. Punit D. Tyagi i/by Ashu Thakur for the Petitioner. Mr. Onkar Chandurkar with Ms. Anjali Chandurkar i/by M/s. Mulla & Mulla & C.B. & C. for the Respondent. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 1st October, 2009. P.C.- 1 The Petitioner by invoking Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) has challenged the termination letter dated 13th April, 2009 and also sought interim protection and stay of the same by filing the present petition on 11th May, 2009. This Court on 13th May, 2009 by reasoned order rejected the prayer of an interim relief. 2 The Appeal against the same is also pending with observation that all further actions of the Respondent are subject to further orders which may be passed by the regular Division Bench. 3 The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent makes statement 2 that now, the Respondent has already allotted the remaining work to a third person to complete the project. The third person is in the possession of the site and working accordingly. The Petitioner has already claimed for the damages before the Arbitral Tribunal and the same is pending. 4 In view of this, without observing anything further and as there is nothing survives in this petition, the Petition is accordingly disposed of. However, I do not deny the right of the parties to raise appropriate pleas and defences before the Arbitral Tribunal. No order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)