HIMACHAL JOINT VENTURE Vs. PANILPINA WORLD TRANSPORT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the judgment and order dated 11th January, 2008 of the learned single Judge dismissing the appellant's petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal seeking reversal thereof.

(2.) THE facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant was desirous of importing Tunnel Boring Machine ("tbm" in short) with backup system and associated equipments from Malm, Norway and Bilbao/spain to Adit-II site of Parbati PB-2 Project site at District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh. The respondent being a leading company in the field of International Freight forwarding with expertise in the movement of such type of heavy machinery submitted its quotations for executing the aforesaid shipment. After discussion and deliberations, revised quotations were submitted. After the preparatory action and submission of offer by the respondent, the appellant issued Letter of Intent on 25th June, 2003. Formal agreement was executed on 15th July, 2003 at Delhi. After signing of the agreement dated 15th July, 2003, certain differences occurred between the parties owing to which the contract was eventually terminated on 2nd August, 2003.

(3.) THE disputes between the parties resulting from the termination of the contract were referred to arbitration. This Court vide order dated 15th march, 2004 appointed Justice Usha Mehra (Retd.) as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties. The respondent filed a statement of claim before the learned Arbitrator in the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- towards cost incurred and for a sum of Rs. 28,28,024/- (10% of the total contract value)as damages along with interest on the total sum @ 24% per annum. In response, the appellant filed its reply to the statement of claims and filed its statement of counter-claims against the respondent.