UNION OF INDIA Vs. AYDIN CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 3.9.1976 the President of India and respondent entered into an agreement whereby the respondent undertook to manufacture and supply to the petitioner six mobile troposcatter communication equipment on the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement and the schedules thereto.

(2.) A supplementary agreement was also entered into between the parties on 20.1.1981. The original agreement provided for the arbitration clause. As the differences and disputes arose between the parties and in view of the arbitration clause contained in the agreement between the parties and the provisions of Section 9B of the Arbitration Act, 1940 the said differences and disputes were initially referred to as Sole Arbitrator on 23.2.1987. But the said Sole Arbitrator resigned.

(3.) COUNSEL for the respondents further urged before me that the present petition is not tenable in law but if the provisions of Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 are read then it would be quite clear that any party to an arbitration agreement can come before the Court to have the effect of the agreement between the parties determined by the Court. Thus, the present petition falls within the purview of Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.