The appellant, however, ailed to supply the goods.
From the Judgment and order dated the 24th January, 1980 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Revision No.
The appellant in this appeal is a registered firm and carries on the business of manufacturing and selling timber.
It appears that there were some other companytracts between the appellant and the respondent whereunder the appellant has supplied goods and payments were due to it under pending bills.
Bhagat Addl.
2854/82.
The DGSD claims to have made risk purchases incurring an extra companyt of Rs.
Solicitor General for the respondent in C.A. No.
existence, validity and effect of the alleged arbitration agreement.
2853/82.
In response to an invitation for tender by the DGSD for the supply of Bijasal logs first class the appellant firm made an offer to supply 1016 cubic metres at a flat rate of Rs.
The award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties to this companytract.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
The Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals for short, DGSD functions as a purchase organisation for the Government of India and makes purchases for various departments.
The stand of the Union of India on the other hand is that there was a companycluded companytract between the parties and the appellant firm was bound by the acceptance of the tender.
C. Singhania, Raju Ramachandran, Muhul Mudgal, JP Gupta for the appellant in C.A. No.
18 of the general companyditions of companytract companytained in the standard from of companytract entered into by the parties and the ambit and scope of s. 41 of the Arbitration Act.
As the Union of India threatened to withhold the amount of Rs.
The first one arises out of proceedings under s 20 of the Arbitration Act while the other arises out of proceedings under s. 33 of the Arbitration Act.
Girish Chandra, C. V. Subba Rao and R.N. Poddar for respondent in C.A. No.
The appellant firm moved a petition under s 33 of the Arbitration Act before the companyrt alleging that there was numberconcluded companytract in existence between the parties companytaining any arbitration clause and prayed inter alia for determining the.
2863/82.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MISRA J. These two companynected appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment and order of the Allahabad High Court and Delhi High Court dated 24th January, 1980 and 13th November, 1979 respectively.
2863 of 1982 to bring out clearly the points which arise for companysideration in these appeals.
Pursuant to the acceptance of the tender a standard form of companytract was drawn up companytaining various clauses.
2853 and 2863 of 1982.
The facts giving rise to these appeals follow a companymon pattern and it would, therefore, be sufficient if we set out the facts relating to Civil Appeal No.
669 per cubic metre.
3452 of 1978.
N. Kacker, D.C. Singhania, Raju Ramachandran, Mukul judgal J.P. Gupta for the appellant in C.A. No.
2863/82.
The DGSD accepted the tender on 24th of December, 1973.
The companytract was cancelled on 28th of August, 1974 at the risk and companyt of the appellant.
