Arbp(L) 43-10 USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 535 OF 2010 IN ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 533 OF 2010 Mr.s. Sheeba Jose & Anr. .. Petitioners v/s. Subramanian Sankaran Iyer & Anr. .. Respondents ......... Mr. C.I. Motagi for the petitioners ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 13th JULY, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioners. According to the petitioners notice of hearing of arbitration proceedings before the learned Arbitrator was not served upon the petitioners and, therefore, the petitioners remained absent. According to them, only when steps were taken against the petitioners for execution of the award, the petitioners came to know about it. The delay as mentioned in the motion is about 339 days. In the ....1 Arbp(L) 43-10 award, there is a specific observation that acknowledgment duly served upon the respondents have not been received, by the Arbitrator. 2. Thereafter, learned Arbitrator has proceed to pass the award. In view of this, case is made out to hold that respondents were not served with the notice of arbitration proceedings. In view of the above, stand taken by the petitioners is required to be accepted. Looking to the quantum of delay and text of the affidavit in support of the notice of motion, the delay has been explained and the same cane be condoned. Hence, the motion is disposed of by passing following order. ORDER (i) Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). There shall be no order as to costs. (ii) Office to process the petition and place it for admission in usual course. (R.Y.GANOO, J.) ....2