PESTICIDES INDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -

(2.) M/s. Pesticides India, plaintiff, entered into an agreement with the Union of India through the Director General of Supplies and Disposal, New Delhi. the respondent invited/tenders for supply of 50 M.T. of Malathion 96% u l.v. vide enquiry dated 17th March, 1979 due on 7th April, 1979. The petitioner/objector submitted the quotation at the rate of Rs. 26,800.00 per M.T. The first supply against the tender was to commence after 15 days of the receipt of the respondents' firm acceptable order. The respondent informed the petitioner to withdraw some conditions and wanted the petitioner to treat the date of despatch as the date of delivery. This proposal of the respondent was not acceptable to the petitioner. However, on 18th May, 1979, the tender was accepted. Petitioner found some conditions at variance with their offer and indicated the same to the respondent. Respondent accordingly agreed to amend the accepted tender, but again made some contrary terms which were objected to. However when the respondent, did not respond to the petitioner's offer, the petitioner withdraw his offer on 18th June, 1979. Subsequent thereto the respondent indicated on 21st June, 1979 that they had amended the acceptance of their tender. This was not agreed to by the petitioner. The correspondences were thereafter exchanged and ultimately the petitioner was directed to meet the Deputy Director General on 15th July, 1979. The petitioner accepted the respondent's requeat on 13th August, 1979, not to withdraw the offer. Accordingly petitioner gave delivery schedule for the supply and for offering for inspection. This was accepted by the respondent. Thus a concluded contract including the amendments issued by the respondent/ UOI which form part of the contract came into existence on 18th May, 1979.

(3.) THE impugned award has been assailed by the claimant Inter alia on the grounds that the Arbitrator has made and published his award beyond the statutory period of four months, therefore, the award is liable to be set aside. Even otherwise the Arbitrator has not taken into consideration the admitted documents filed by the objector and also the documents filed by the respondent/ UOI which strengthen the case of the petitioner. Arbitrator having ignored the admitted documents has misconducted himself and the proceedings.