MTNL Vs. VINDHYA TELELINKS LTD. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, "the Act") for setting aside the award dated 24th February 2005 passed by the Arbitrator (respondent No. 2) directing petitioner to pay to the claimant a sum of Rs. 7,86,261/ - along with pendent lite and future interest @ 8% per annum on the principal amount from 1st April 2002 till the date of payment.

(2.) THE grounds raised in the objections are that the learned Arbitrator failed to appreciate that the dispute with respect to the liquidated damages was outside the purview of the arbitration agreement and the award passed by the learned Arbitrator was quorum non judice and liable to be set aside.

(3.) BRIEF facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are that the petitioner had placed a purchase order dated 12th October 1994 for supply of polythene insulated jelly tin telecom cables of different specifications on the respondent. A delivery schedule of the supply of cables was given in the Annexure -B to the order. The delivery schedule provided for supply of entire quantity of cables up to 15th February 2000. The claimant (respondent herein) vide letter dated 12th January 2000 requested for re -fixing the delivery schedule so as to enable it to supply the entire quantity of cables till 31st March 2000. Vide letter dated 28th February 2000, the petitioner extended the delivery period for 10 weeks from the date of issue of order, for supply of balance quantities, but only in respect of 7 sizes of cables out of 13 sizes. The petitioner's letter gave a tabular statement indicating the new/ extended delivery period of 7 sizes of cables ranging from 25th March 2000 to 15th April 2000. The delivery schedule in respect of rest of the sizes of cables was not provided. In fact, the petitioner had by a prior fax message told respondent/ claimant not to supply outstanding quantities in respect of 3 sizes cables namely 400/0.5A, 400/0.5UA, 1200/0.5UA. The respondent vide letter dated 13th March 2000 reminded the petitioner that it had not given extension in respect of remaining 6 sizes of cable and told that the quantities of cables of those 6 sizes were also lying ready with it awaiting delivery and if extension was given, the cables would be offered for inspection and delivery. No response was received. The claimant /respondent sent a reminder dated 26th April 2000 asking for re -fixing the schedule for rest of the 6 sizes of cables.