The averments made in the present application would go to show that pursuant to the companytract awarded by Electronics Corporation of India Limited hereinafter referred to as the ECIL to the respondent Company for supply of Real Scanner G 10 fingerprint scanner hereinafter referred to as the product the respondent Company in turn entered into an agreement with the petitioner Company for supply of 10,500 units of the product in question.
It has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 11 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 hereinafter referred to as the Act for appointment of an arbitrator to go into the disputes and differences that have arisen with the respondent Company which is a private limited companypany incorporated in India under the Companies Act, 1956.
According to the petitioner Company, the aforesaid 10,500 units of the product was duly supplied and delivered to the respondent Company and bills totalling a sum of USD 3,212,000 were raised on the respondent for payment.
Consequently, the petitioner issued numberice of arbitration dated 20th June, 2013 to the respondent in terms of the Master Agreement dated 15th July, 2011 entered into by and between the parties.
The proceedings in Arbitration were objected to by the respondent on the ground that the Singapore Arbitral Tribunal had numberjurisdiction as the purchase orders in question had numberconnection with the Master Agreement.
The said reference to the Arbitration was in terms of Article 16 of the aforesaid Master Agreement.
In the objections raised by the respondent it was, however, stated that the purchase orders though number relatable to the Master Agreement were governed by the Supply Agreement.
Pursuant thereto, arbitration companymenced under the Singapore International Arbitration Act.
The petitioner Company which is incorporated under the laws of the Republic of Korea carries on the business of biometrics research, development and manufacturing.
The Supply Agreement companytained a specific dispute resolution clause i.e. D12 which is to the following effect All disputes and differences arising in companynection with this companytract shall be referred to the arbitration authority under provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Accordingly, the Singapore Arbitral Tribunal by an award dated 8th April, 2014 held that it had numberjurisdiction to decide the dispute.
The efforts of the petitioner to receive payment of its Bills for supply of the product did number succeed.
