1 Arbap64.11 kambli IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.64 OF 2011 ... M/s.Prakash Industrial Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. and ors. ...Applicants v/s. M/s.Pharmabase India Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent ... Mr.Ajay Panicker i/b Ajay Law Associates for the Applicants. Mr.G.R.Mehta for Respondent. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, J. DATED: 5th August, 2011 P.C.: This Petition is filed for appointment of substitute arbitrator, as the Arbitrator Mr.M.P.S.Rao has resigned. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent states that according to arbitration 2 Arbap64.11 clause power to make appointment of arbitrator is with the Managing Director of the Respondent and that in exercise of that power the Managing Director of the Respondent has appointed Mr.Atul Burman as Arbitrator. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that as previously the Managing Director did not make appointment of the arbitrator, application under Section 11 was filed in this court and this court appointed by agreement of parties Mr.M.P.S.Rao as Arbitrator, now the Managing Director has no power to make the appointment. According to him, therefore, the court can still appoint the substitute arbitrator. In my opinion, even assuming that the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner to be right in saying that the Managing Directors do not have power to appoint Mr. Atul Burman as Arbitrator, the appointment has, in fact, been made. Therefore, without getting the appointment of Mr.Burman terminated, a substitute arbitrator 3 Arbap64.11 cannot be appointed. Petition is, therefore, disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to adopt such remedy as may be available in law to the Petitioner. In view of disposal of Petition, Notice of Motion disposed of as infructuous. (D.K.Deshmukh, J.)