A.M. AHMADI, V. RAMASWAMI AND M. FATHIMA BEEVI, JJ.
Civil appeal No. 1423 of 1991, D/- 3-4-1991.
Burn Standard Company Ltd. Appellant
Versus
M/s. McDermott International Inc. and another, Respondents.
Constitution Of India,1950 – Article, X - Reserve Bank - Payment of installment - Appeal by special leave is whether arbitration clause contained Technical Collaboration Agreement entered into at Dubai United Arab Emirates between appellant Burn Standard Company Ltd- a Government of India Undertaking and respondent McDermott International foreign company is rendered void by virtue of agreement itself being initio void for want of general or special permission of Reserve Bank of India Foreign Exchange Regulation relevant part of said provision reads Government company incorporated Companies having its registered office at IOC Hungerford Street Calcutta whereas respondent is Corporation and existing under laws Republic of Panama with its executive office Common Street New Orleans Louisiana with a branch office at Box said parties entered into an agreement styled "Technical Collaboration Agreement" for fabrication of off-shore platform structure including but not limited to Jackets Piles Decks Modules Platform and Pipeline components including their sub-components for oil and gas industry which required high degree of expertise and experience as well as technical knowhow possessed by respondent –Held, Emphasis must be laid on substance and not on mere form- If there has been substantial compliance as in this case mere lapse part in failing to communicate its decision should make difference- Paragraph 25A-2 is not in derogation of paragraph nor does it dilute requirement - In any case facts of present case clearly reveal that R-B-I- had applied its mind to question of grant of permission and had only thereafter permitted remittance of first fees payable to foreign collaborator- Merely because application for such permission was not made in FNC form cannot cloud fact that decision to grant permission was actually taken but ministerial function communicating same remained to done by oversight- This lapse cannot erase decision already taken- Court are therefore opinion that - had granted permission contemplated by and hence agreement cannot be voided by virtue - It is not case RBI that at any- time had second thoughts about its action- It never contemplated withdrawal of permission at any point of time thereafter- Once decision to grant permission is taken whether through course charted by paragraph that decision stands unless rescinded and authorities are bound act in aid there Court are constrained to observe that Court were pained at attitude of appellant-company attempting to thwart a valid agreement part performed by payment of first grounds an attitude which would scare away collaborators and tarnish image and credibility of our entrepreneurs abroad - Appeal dismissed
Judgement
AHMADI, J.:- Special leave granted.
2. The principal question which this Court is called upon to answer in this appeal by special leave is whether the arbitration clause contained in Art. XII (paragraph 12. 1) of the Technical Collaboration Agreement entered into at Dubai, United Arab Emirates, on September 25, 1984, between the appellant Burn Standard Company Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking, and the respondent McDermott International Inc., a foreign company, is rendered void by virtue of the agreement itself being ab initio void for want of general or special permission of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) under S. 28 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA). The relevant part of the said provision reads as under:
"28(1)- Without prejudice to the provisions of S. 47 and notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act or the Companies Act, 1956, a person resident outside India (whether a citizen of India or not) or a person who is not a citizen of India but is resident in India, or a company (other than a banking company) which is not incorporated under any law in force in India or in which the non-resident interest is more than forty per cent, or any branch of such company, shall not, except with the general or special permission of the Reserve Bank,-
(a) act, or accept appointment, as agent in India or any person or company, in the trading or commercial transactions of such person or company; or
(b) act, or accept appointment, as technical or management adviser in India or any person or company; or
(c) permit any trade mark, which he or it is entitled to use, to be used by any person or company for any direct or indirect consideration.
(2) where any such person or company (including its branch) as is referred to in subsec. (1) acts or accepts appointment as such agent, or technical management adviser, or permits the use of any such trade mark, without the permission of the Reserve Bank, such acting, appointment or permission, as the case may be, shall be void.
The petitioner is a Government company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at IOC, Hungerford Street, Calcutta, whereas the respondent is a Corporation organised and existing under the laws of the Republic of Panama with its executive office at P.O. Box 61961, 1010 ,Common Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70161, U.S.A., with a branch office at P.O. Box 3098, Dubai, UAE. On 25th September, 1984 the said parties entered into an agreement, styled "Technical Collaboration Agreement", for the fabrication of off-shore platform structure, including but not limited to Jackets, Piles, Decks, Modules, Platform and Pipeline components, including their sub-components, for the oil and gas industry which required the high degree of expertise and experience as well as the technical knowhow possessed by the respondent. The duration of the agreement was fixed under Art. VIII to be five years from the effective date or five years after commencement of commercial production, whichever is greater, or until otherwise terminated earlier under the agreement. The expression effective date as defined in Art. 1 means the date on which notification is received by the respondent that all Governmental approvals relating to the agreement have been secured; provided that if such approvals are not secured within 180 days from the signing of the agreement, the agreement, upon notice pursuant to Art. XVII of the agreement by either party may be made ineffective whereupon the agreement shall be treated as null and void. Obviously the purpose of the agreement was to establish the basis whereupon the respondent was to provide and the appellant was to receive technology and special technical services related to the establishment and operation of Fabrication Yard for fabricating off-shore platform structures and additional special technical services for any contracts related to marine construction activities that are awarded to the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.