RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. ENGINEERING PROJECTS INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The meaningful question that falls for consideration in the instant revision is whether a void condition of agreement is severable from the main agreement or it renders entire agreement as void ?

(2.) This question arises in circumstances set out below.

(3.) The petitioner filed an application under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short the Act of 1940) inter alia questioning the validity of Article 14 of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 18-8-1989 (in short the MOU) initiated by Shri Shiv Prakash, respondent No. 2, at the instance of the Engineering Projects (India) Ltd., New Delhi (respondent No. 1). The case of the petitioner before the learned Court below was that the offers given by the respondent No. 1 on June 27, 1989 and July 29, 1989 for construction of houses at Jaipur for and on behalf of the petitioner were accepted by the petitioner and accordingly a MOU which was to remain in force for three years came to be executed on 16-8-1989. Article 14 of the said MOU is as under :