G.S. Sistani, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking, inter alia, an ad interim injunction restraining the defendant from selling, parting with possession, creating any change or removing/shipping out of India, its plant, machinery and other equipment from the local limits of this Court. This Court vide orders dated 13.5.2005 and 18.5.2005 granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of the petitioner.

2. Brief facts, giving rise to the lis between the parties and eventually the present petition, may first be noticed.

.3. The petitioner, namely, Punj Lloyd Ltd., is a company registered in India, having its registered office at New Delhi. The respondent namely, Valentine Maritime (Mauritius) Ltd., is a Mauritian company having its Gulf representative office at Abu Dhabi. The respondent on 1.12.2003, had entered into a contract with Gujarat Adani Port Ltd. (GAPL) whereunder the respondent was required to execute the work of designing, engineering and commissioning of section of 48? pipeline between K.P. I.0 to K.P. 0 of length 8.82 Km, including inter tidal portion, located in Mundra Port, Off Mundra, Kutch, Gujarat.

4. In pursuance of the contract dated 1.12.2003, the respondent on 29.1.2004, entered into a sub-contract agreement No. C0309/SC-01/04 with the petitioner whereby and whereunder the petitioner undertook to provide its know-how, technology, personnel, expertise, experience and other onshore assistance in erection and testing of section of the said 48? pipeline at Gujrat. In terms of the sub-contract agreement, the sub-contract work, priced at US$ 18,66,700, was required to be executed on a ?back-to-back? basis with the main contract dated 1.12.2003. The stipulated deadline for completion of the sub-contract work was 28.12.2004 The respondent in pursuance of the sub-contract agreement dated 29.1.2004, brought into India its plant, machinery and equipment. The petitioner carried out its obligations under the sub-contract agreement dated 29.01.2004 and completed the sub-contract work on 23.3.2005. Consequently, the petitioner demobilised its equipment and manpower with effect from 24.3.2005.

.5. The lis in the present petition relates to certain overdue payments arising in pursuance of the work completed under the sub-contract agreement dated 29.1.2004 The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent owes to it payments in respect of the various invoices raised by the petitioner for completion of the sub-contract work as well as payments incurred towards extra work, overstay charges, additional joint coating material, double handling consignment, storage, etc. It is vehemently submitted that that the petitioner has been constantly reminding the respondent of the overdue payments but to no avail. Apprehending that the respondent might remove its plant, machinery and equipment from the local limits of the courts in India and thereby evade its payments overdue to the petitioner, the petitioner has knocked the doors of this Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking relief in the following terms:

.(1) Restrain the respondent its servants, agents and representatives by an ad interim injunction from selling, parting with possession, creating any charge or removing/shipping out of India, the plant, machinery and equipment from the local limits of the jurisdiction the Court.

.(2) It is further prayed that the respondent be directed to furnish security in the sum of Rs. 4.00 crore to secure the interest of the petitioner pending the arbitration proceedings.

.6. Per contra, the respondent has vehemently resisted the relief sought by the petitioner by putting forth the following objections:

.(i) Firstly, presuming that the arbitration clause of the main contract dated 1.12.2003 forms part of the sub-contract agreement dated 29.1.2004, the venue of arbitration being at Ahmedabad, only the local c