SABITA RANI AGARWAL Vs. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent is not represented even at the second call. No affidavit-in-opposition has been filed despite the respondent obtaining directions therefor though a copy of a proposed affidavit has been forwarded to the petitioner. The petitioner refers to the arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties that recognizes that the Chief General Manager of BSNL Telecom Factory, Calcutta or the officer entrusted the duties of Chief General Manager would take up a reference or appoint another as arbitrator. The contract related to the supply of goods by the petitioner to the respondent.

(2.) As is evident from an order dated April 24, 2009, passed on an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner complained to this Court that the respondent had sought to unilaterally revise the rates specified in the contract and offered the petitioner a lower price. The writ petition was disposed of by permitting the petitioner herein to accept the lower price without prejudice to its rights and contentions and by observing that the disputes between the parties could be resolved through arbitration since the agreement contained an arbitration clause. An appeal from the order dated April 24, 2009 failed. In the appellate order it was recorded that the arbitration clause had been invoked by the appellant by a letter dated March 27, 2009.

(3.) On the strength of such recording in the appellate order of June 8, 2009, the petitioner here refers to a document dated March 27, 2009, which is a letter addressed by the petitioner to the Chief General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited at its Telecom Factory at Alipore and carries the caption of "Arbitration in the Alipore Tender Matter." The body of the letter must be seen in its entirety:-