SUDERSHAN KARIR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this suit is to the award of the Arbitrator/dated 31st December 1977 on a dispute having been referred to him.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that in pursuance of an invitation to tender the respondent No. 1/objector gave an offer for the supply of C.I. Brake Blocks. This offer included a price variation clause which, inter alia, provided that the price offered would be subject to various in case of increase in price of the raw material being used.

(3.) THE principal contention of the counsel for the respondent is that clause 7 of the acceptance of tender, which has been quoted hereinabove, was vague. It contended that according to the principles of incorporation it is necessary that the clause which has to be incorporated should be constructively construed. Reference is made to Dwarkadas and Co v. Daluram Goganmull (AIR 1951 Calcutta 10).