M/S UNISSI (INDIA) PVT. LTD. versus POST GRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION & RESEARCH

Citation: [2008] 14 S.C.R. 108 · Decided: 01-10-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: TARUN CHATTERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 14 S.C.R. 108 
("-
A 
M/S. UNISSI (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 
II. 
POST GRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION 
& RESEARCH 
(Civil Appeal No. 6039 of 2008) 
B 
OCTOBER 1, 2008 
[TARUN CHATTERJEE AND DALVEER BHANDARI, 
\:---
JJ.] 
c 
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Ss. 7, 11(4)(a): 
,_
I 
Arbitration agreement - Tender for purchase of certain 
goods - Supply of goods - Rejection thereof by buyer affer 
).-
one year on ground that agreement not signed by it - Dispute 
- Application for appointment of Arbitrator- Dismissed by trial 
D Court holding that there was no agreement executed between 
the parties - Correctness of- Held: In view of tender offer made 
~ 
by buyer, respondent issuing supply order and consequently 
accepting and using goods so supplied - In such circum-
stances and in view of provisions of law and principles laid 
, ..... 
E down by Supreme Court on the issue, the arbitration agree-
ment did exist and, therefore, the matter should be referred to 
an Arbitrator - Hence, the matter be placed before the Chief 
Justice of the High Court to appoint an Arbitrator in accordance 
with law to resolve the dispute between the parties. 
F 
, The questions which arose for determination in this 
appeal before this Court were as to whether in the facts 
and circumstances of the case, there exists an agreement 
when one of the parties to the agreement had not put its 
signature on the same and as to whether in pursuance of 
~ 
G such an agreement, an Arbitrator could be appointed. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
...--
HELD: 1.1 In the instant case, a tender enquiry for 
purchase of the goods in question was floated by the re-
H 
108 
M/S. UNISSI (INDIA) PVT. LTD. v. POST GRADUATE 
109 
INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDU. & RESE. 
1 
spondent. The tender of the appellant was accepted by A 
the respondent for supplying the goods to their different 
departments. The tender documents itself contain an ar-
bitration clause and by reason of acceptance of the ten-
der by the respondent, it must be held that there was a 
valid arbitration agreement between the parties. The ap-
8 
I 
pellant supplied the goods and the receipt thereof was 
- -I 
duly acknowledged on behalf of the respondent on the 
delivery challans. (Para -12) [117-F-H, 118-A] 
1.2 In the letters issued by the respondent, there was 
an apparent acknowledgement of supply of the goods by c 
the appellant and also reference to the tender enquiry 
number. It is an admitted position that the appellant had 
sent the agreement containing the arbitration clause, as 
per the format provided by the respondent, after duly sign-
ing the same on requisite value of stamp paper for sign-
D 
ing of the same by the respondent. The respondent 
though admittedly received the same, did not send back 
the agreement to the appellant after signing it as per the 
agreement between the parties. The respondent admit-
tedly had used the goods in question for about a year E 
and thereafter returned the same to the appellant. Subse-
quently, the bank guarantee furnished by the appellant 
and the earnest money deposit was encashed and for-
'""' 
feited by the respondent. (Para - 12) [118-A-D] 
\ 
1.3 In view of the facts and the correspondences be-
F 
tween the parties, particularly the tender offer made by 
the appellant and supply order of the respondent, and, in 
view of an arbitration agreement between the parties and 
the action taken on behalf of the appellant and in view of 
Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and con-
G 
--{ 
sidering the principles laid down in the decisions of this 
Court, this Court is of the view that the arbitration agree-
ment did exist and therefore the matter should be referred 
to an Arbitrator for decision. That apart, the documents 
on record apparently show supply of materials by the H 
110 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 14 S.C.R. 
A appellant and acceptance thereof by the respondent in 
pursuance of the tender enquiry by the respondent, 
wherein tender of the appellant containing an arbitration 
clause was admittedly accepted by the respondent. In that 
view of the matter, it cannot be said that the respondent 
B , should now be allowed to wriggle out from the arbitration 
agreement. (Paras - 12 & 13) [118-D-G] 
c 
Smita Conductors Ltd. vs. Euro Alloys Ltd. (2001) 7 SCC 
728 and Nimet Resources Inc. vs. Essar Steels Ltd. (2000) 7 
sec 497 - relied on. 
2. Although no formal agreement was executed, the 
tender documents indicating certai

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.