1. All these four Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common order in view of the common question of law involved in all the cases.

2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned counsel for second respondent. None appeared for the first respondent.

3. The petitioner is a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacture of paper and paper products. In the course of its business, the petitioner company was approached in the year 1997 by the second respondent offering to supply optical whitening agent (hereinafter referred to as ‘goods’) which is used as raw material in the manufacture of paper and paper products. After negotiations, both the parties agreed for the supply of goods. The petitioner company placed orders on the second respondent for supply of goods and the second respondent supplied the goods to the petitioner between November, 1997 to March, 2001 and raised several bills. One of the terms of the supply was that after supply of the goods, the petitioner company would inspect them and subject them to quality tests. After the quality is confirmed, the petitioner would avail a credit period of 60 days after which it would relea