JUDGMENT 1. - Shri Dinesh Kala prays for adjournment of the matter on the ground that Mrs. F. Kappor, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has not come. It is hardly a ground to grant this prayer made for adjournment of the matter. Shri Dinesh Kala is also an Advocate in the matter. If two Advocates are engaged in the matter and in case one is not available, his absence will not be taken to be a ground for adjournment of the matter. Thus, this prayer made is declined. 2. Perused the memo of the revision petition and the order dated 12.10.1998 of the learned District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Civil Misc. Application (Arbitration) No. 307/96. 3. Having gone through the order impugned in this revision petition I am satisfied that the learned trial Court has not committed any illegality in granting the application of the respondent and to direct the Arbitrator to complete the arbitration proceedings within a period of six months. The petitioner participated in the arbitration proceedings but for one or the other reason the same could not be completed and thus the respondent had filed the application for continuation of the arbitration proceedings and for direction to the Arbitrator to complete the same wit reasonable time. 4. It is an era where eff s should be made to settle the matters by arbitration but the petitions s working contrarily and approaching the Courts to delay the proceedings. 5. In the result this revision petition fails and the same is dismissed. There shall be no order to costs.Revision petition dismissed. *******