Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU
Denel (Proprietary Limited)
Versus
Bharat Electronics Ltd. & Another
Arbitration Petition No. 16 Of 2009
Decided on : 10-05-2010
(2009) 8 SCC 520; (2000) 8 SCC 151; AIR1995 SC 2464 – Relied upon
(2006) 4 SCC 372 – Distinguished
Facts of the case:
This is an application under sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of a sole arbitrator.
Finding of the Court:
Petitioner is entitled to appointment of arbitrator.
Result:
Application allowed.
Judgment :-
H.L. Dattu, J.
1) The Petitioner has filed the present Arbitration Petition under sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). It is prayed in the petition to appoint a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
2) The Petitioner is a company wholly owned by the Government of the Republic of South Africa, duly incorporated as per the laws of the Republic of South Africa, with its main business address at Denel Head Office, Nelmapius Drive, Irene, Pretoria, Republic of South Africa.
3) The Respondent is a Corporation duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Pune, Maharashtra. It is a Government of India Enterprise, Ministry of Defence, Government of India.
4) The Petitioner - company had several internal divisions, one of them being Denel Eloptro at the time when the contracts between Petitioner and Respondent were entered into. The name of the said division was changed from Delnel Eloptro to Denel Ptonics with effect from 1st April, 2004. The Optronics division was not a separate legal entity, but was only a business unit of the Petitioner.
5) The Respondent in the year 2004, placed certain purchase orders with Denel Eloptro for supply of various electronic equipments which are listed as under:
1. PUR/PN/C1/621977 dated 28th July 2004
2. PUR/PN/CN/621973 dated 28th July 2004
3. PUR/PN/C1/622029 dated 11th December 2004
6) The `General Terms and Conditions of the Purchase Order (Foreign) contains an Arbitration Clause. Clause 10 of the Purchase Order, inter-alia, provides for arbitration in case of dispute arising from the interpretation or from any matter relating to the rights and obligations of the parties. It also refers to the appointment of the `Managing Director or his nominee' of the respondent as the arbitrator. It is not in dispute that the said Clause in the Purchase Order is a valid arbitration agreement in terms of Section 2(b) read with Section 7 of the Act. The Petitioner before the delivery of the goods to the Respondent as per the orders placed by them entered into a credit insurance policy with one Credit Guarantee Insurance Corporation of Africa Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Corporation") in respect of the said Purchase Orders.
7) The petitioner states, that, it duly performed its obligations in terms of the purchase orders and delivered the goods as ordered and the invoices were issued. The said delivery of goods was also accepted by the respondent without raising any objection. It is further stated, that, as the goods were accepted and utilized, the respondent was liable to pay the value of the goods in a sum of GBP 34,894.75(Thirty Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Ninety Four and 75 Pence Pound Sterling).
8) The petitioner raised a demand with respondent for the aforesaid amount. However, the respondent vide letter dated 4th May 2005, refused to pay the said amount, only on the ground that it is a "Government Company" under the Ministry of Defence, Government of India and in view of the direction issued by the Ministry to withhold payment of the said invoices, it is unable to settle the amounts due to the petitioner.
9) The Insurance Corporation also requested, vide its letter dated 29th May 2006, to pay the amount raised against them. The respondent by its reply letter dated 8th June 2006 addressed to the Corporation - insurer, inter alia contended, that, as per the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, to discontinue dealings with M/s DENEL (PYT) LTD., and withhold payment due if any, it is unable to satisfy its liability to the petitioner.
10) Petitioner through its Advocate addressed a letter dated 29th November, 2006, inter-alia, requesting them to make payments towards three Purchase Orders -PUR/PN/CI/621977 dated 28.07.2004, PUR/PN/CN/621973 dated 28.07.2004 and PUR/PN/CI/622029 dated 11.12.2004.
11) The respondent thro
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.