9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time up to 30th September, 1993 and the arbitrator vide his award dated 29.9.1993 made and published his award. After the arbitrator filed the award in this court on 7.1.1994, notices were issued to the parties regarding filing of the award and objections, if any. On 8th March, 1994, it was noticed that the objections have been filed. Vide order dated 28.11.2001, the delay in filing the application for condensation in setting aside the ex parte judgment of the court was allowed and the objections filed were ordered to be transferred to the appropriate file. The objections to the award which were filed on behalf of M/s. Victor Cable Industries Ltd. to the award dated 29th September, 1993 have been registered as Suit No. 35/94. 3. M/s. Victor Cable Industries Ltd. had filed a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 i.e. Suit No. 1055/94 praying therein that the disputes arisen from another purchase order No. ST/SPI/TE-1991/1329 dated 11.3.1992 be referred to arbitration. The disputes were referred to arbitration and finally in that case also, an award was passed in favor of the M/s. Victor Cable Limited on 6.2.1996. Objections to the said award were dismissed and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a long time and they are aware of the system and working of the said undertaking. The undertaking had placed two purchase orders dated 30.1.1990 and 19.2.90 for 75 kms and 50 kms of cable. The price fixed between the parties was per unit Rs. 76,298.55/- per km. 7. These facts were taken to be admitted between the parties or treated irrefutable and the essence of the contract between the parties by the arbitrator. The learned arbitrator after considering the materials on record and examining the case of the respective parties decided the case as under:- In consequence M/s. Victor Cable Industries Ltd., (formerly known as M/s. Victor Cables Limited), are liable to:- 1. Pay an amount of Rs. 40,07,225/- (Rupees forty lakhs seven thousand two hundred twenty five only), being the difference in risk purchase for purchase order No:ST(SP-I)/TE-1873/1594 dated 30-1-1990 and additional purchase order No. ST(SP-I)/TE-1873/1686 dated 19-2-90, which amount the claimant has lost in procuring the ordered quantities, to the claimant DESU. 2. Pay the aforesaid amount to the claimant DESU within period of three months from the date of this award, where after interest @ 18% per annum will be payable t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DESU that they invited tenders for the supply of goods in question and the tenders were opened on 30.8.1989. The company had also submitted their offer and they were requested to give their consent at their quoted rate of Rs. 76,289.55/- per km. computed to Rs. 1,00580/-. The company was to send their consent by 7.12.89 and was to be valid up to 15.2.90. Vide letter dated 5.12.89, the company had conveyed their acceptance and the validity period up to 15.2.90. After the purchase order for supply of 75 kms cable was placed vide purchase order dated 30.1.90 , the company vide their letter dated 8.2.1990 requested that their quoted rates should be varied from Rs. 76,289.55/- to Rs. 76,298.55/-. This request was repeated by letter dated 12.2.1990 and the company is stated to have informed the undertaking that they would be prepared to supply an additional order of 50 kms, if this order was placed on them within one month from the date of the main purchase order. The company submitted bank guarantee vide their letter dated 15.2.90. As such, there was a complete concluded contract and as the company failed to make the requested supplies, the risk purchase was effected at their cost and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their letter dated 12.2.90, it is clear from the record of the arbitrator that the company had submitted the bank guarantee in compliance to the said letter. All doubts were to be at rest vide letter dated 31.5.1990 when the undertaking informed the company that there is no much difference in the price structure and the letter dated 14.5.1990 was not appreciated. Thereafter notices were given by the undertaking to the company to complete the supplies which in any case is not in dispute, were not effected. In this very letter, it was informed to the company that they were expected to commence the supplies immediately and confirm within seven days positively, failing which the department would be compelled to take action as per the terms and conditions. The company despite service of the such letter, chose not to take any action nor effected the supplies. This clearly shows a complete acquiescence on the part of the company in the claim of the undertaking. Vide letter dated 18.4.90, the company had stated that the purchase order should be treated as cancelled without any financial repercussions. The subsequent correspondence on the part of the company as well as the plea before the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffer. These complimentary ideas present the convenient method of analyzing a situation provided that they are not applied too literally. An offer and acceptance capable of being converted into an agreement or concluded contract must consist of definite offer and acceptance. Tender certainly is an invitation to offer which was submitted by the company, where after the undertaking had required, vide their letter dated 30.11.89, the company to submit its firm acceptance for the validity period of the contract till 15.2.1990. This offer unconditionally was submitted by the company vide its letter dated 5.12.89, thus, constituted a definite offer and unambiguous and unconditional acceptance. This was case of standing offer during the period and up to 15.2.90. In the case of Great Northern Rly. Co. v. Witham (1873) LR 9 CP 16 where the company had accepted the tender, placed confirmatory orders which partly were even executed by the defendant, it was held that it was a case of standing offer to be converted into series of contract and the company was entitled to succeed in the case in an action for breach of contract. The orders up to 15.2.90 pro tanto fell beyond the possibility of revo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
