Parties and Application: Application under Sections 11(5) and 11(9) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by M/s. Nandan Biomatrix Limited (applicant) against D 1 Oils Limited (non-applicant) for appointment of arbitrator under clause 15.1 of Supply Agreement dated 10.08.2004. [1000470580001][1000470580002] (!) (!)

Supply Agreement Details: Applicant engaged in seed cloning, nursery development, etc.; agreed to establish nurseries and supply seedlings to non-applicant, who promised investment of Rs. 299.35 lakhs. Contains arbitration clause 15.1 for institutional arbitration in India under 1996 Act. [1000470580002] (!) (!)

Other Agreements: Joint Venture Agreement dated 30.09.2004 (no arbitration clause); Termination Agreement dated 16.10.2004 (disputed); R&D Agreement dated 26.11.2004 (later addendum added arbitration clause). No claim under Joint Venture Agreement. [1000470580003][1000470580004][1000470580005][1000470580006]

Applicant's Claims: Willful breach by non-applicant under Supply Agreement; Termination Agreement forged (signatures of two Directors forged, no authority); noticed on 24.05.2005; criminal complaint filed 01.09.2005; seeks damages for expenses/reimbursement for seedlings supplied. [1000470580007][1000470580008][1000470580009]

Non-Applicant's Defenses: Arbitration clause 15.1 vague/uncertain/void (no specific institution or rules named); no arbitration agreement for claims under other agreements; Supply Agreement terminated by valid Termination Agreement dated 16.10.2004 (signed, mutual, all claims ceased); R&D Agreement implemented separately; applicant in breach of R&D. [1000470580010][1000470580011] (!)

Issues Framed: (a) Existence of valid arbitration agreement; (b) Existence of live claim. Power under Section 11(6) is judicial, not administrative. (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000470580012]

Arbitration Agreement Validity (Issue a): Clause 15.1 valid under Section 7; no prescribed form required; must ascertain intention from agreement, correspondence, circumstances; parties intended disputes resolved by institutional arbitration in India under 1996 Act; vagueness argument (no specific institution) rejected as form not essential, intention suffices. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)

Live Claim (Issue b): Exists due to disputes over Termination Agreement (forgery? authority? effect?); interplay with other agreements; whether claims under Supply Agreement extinguished; basic claim for damages/reimbursement for seedlings supplied. (!) (!) (!) (!)

Undertaking and Order: Applicant undertakes to withdraw criminal complaint (FIR No.902/2005 at Hyderabad). Disputes referred to Singapore International Arbitration Centre to nominate arbitrator from its panel; application allowed, no costs. (!) (!) (!)