GOVERNMENT OF INDIA BSNL Vs. ACOME

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (The Act) to set aside the majority award dated 1/2/2002 passed by an Arbitral Tribunal consisting of three members.

(2.) In relation to a contract for supply of PIJF cables for Department of Telecommunications (DOT) and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL), the parties had entered into an agreement by issuance of two purchase orders by the petitioner both dated 1.6.1988. Dispute arose between the parties since according to the petitioner, some of the supplies were defective while the respondent contended that supplies were good and were in fact utilised by the respondent.

(3.) The matter was taken to arbitration consisting of three technical experts, namely, Mr. B.R.Nair (the Chairman of the Tribunal), Mr. T. Narayanamoorthy (the arbitrator nominated by the respondent) and Mr. Ranbir Khanna (the arbitrator nominated by the petitioner). Two of the arbitrators, namely, Mr. B.R.Nair and T. Narayanamoorthy made and published their majority award on 1/2/2002. This award was not signed by the third arbitrator, namely, Sh. Ranbir Khanna. However, the reasons for not signing the award are contained in the award itself. In paragraph 6 of the award the majority arbitrators recorded that a draft award was prepared and circulated by the Secretariat and was discussed by the three Arbitrators on 12/11/2001. While the Presiding Arbitrator Mr. B.R.Nair and Mr. T.Narayanamoorthy were more or less in agreement, the third arbitrator, namely, Mr. Ranbir Khanna disagreed with them and expressed his desire to make a separate award.