ASSOCIATED BUILDERS Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT , J.-

(2.) THE petitioner filed a petition under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, i940 inter alia pleading that there is no valid arbitration agreement in existence between the parties and, therefore, the respondents could not forfeit the earnest money amounting to Rs. 20,000 in terms of the agreement. According to the petitioner, the validity of the acceptance of the offerofthecontractindisputewastill30.11.1988. THE case of the petitioner is that respondent by their letter dated 29.11.1988, though sent by registered post, which was received on or about 3.12.1988. THE main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the said acceptance the respondents modified the conditions which was ottered by the petitioner on 28.4.1988. Mr. Dewan, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that if the condition of the offer was at variance with the original offer made by the petitioner, no legal, valid and binding contract came into existence, He further argued that the alleged acceptance was put in transmission after the expiry of the validity period.