JAIN TRADERS Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER UPRVUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are filed by the same petitioner under Sections 9 and 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the 'Act') for appointment of an Arbitrator in each of these petitions to decide the alleged disputes which have arisen between the parties. The respondents are also the same in both the petitions, namely, the Executive Engineer, U.P.R.V. Utpadan Nigam Ltd. and MSTC Ltd. The respondent No.2, on behalf of the respondent No.1, had floated two tenders for sale of scrap on "as and where basis". The bids submitted by the petitioner in respect of both the tenders were the highest and were accepted. The disputes which have arisen are common in both the cases. Therefore, purpose would be served in narrating the facts of one of these cases and the facts as appeared in OMP No. 263/2005 are accordingly stated.

(2.) In this case Tender No.MSTC (D)/T-547/UPRVUNL/03-04 was floated for sale of scrap as "damaged 125 MVA Transformer HT/LT Coil Set". The opening date of tender was 19th March 2004 at 2:30 PM. Stores could be inspected from 4th March 2004 to 18th March 2004. The description of the scrap, given in the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) was as under:-

(3.) Thus it was projected that gross weight of each set of Coil was 13.5 tons (tentative) and the material was offered on as is where is basis. Along with the tender terms and conditions were also circulated. Para 5 related to "quality, quantity and security of sold material". Since paras 5.1 to 5.4 are relevant for our purposes, they are reproduced below :-