but has since called upon the Petitioners to make the necessary arrangements for storing and guarding the said hypothecated assets. Mr Madon points out that given the value of the hypothecated assets was only in the region of Rs. 7 lakhs, the Petitioners on enquiry learnt that it would costs approximately Rs. 80,000/- to Rs. 1 lakh for the initial transportation cost etc. and further Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- per month for storing of the same. it was thus he submitted that the Petitioners had filed the present Interim Application seeking the aforesaid relief. He then submitted that the Respondents though served were not today appearing. He then submitted that the Respondents could not have any objection to the Petitioner selling the hypothecated assets since the said hypothecated assets would have been sold by the Respondents in their usual course of business. He also pointed out that there was no dispute that there were defaults on the part of the Respondents and under the Agreements entered into between the parties. The Petitioner had right to sale the hypothecated assets. It was thus that he submitted that no useful purpose would be served in storing the said hypothecated assets. He submitted that if the same were permitted to be sold, the sale proceeds would be deposited with the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court and would be subject to adjustments pending the final hearing and disposal of the arbitration proceedings which had now commenced between the parties.
