Court affirmed that the existence of an arbitration agreement can be inferred from parties' conduct and correspondence, even absent formal signing of the contract, emphasizing the binding nature of agreements formed through bidding processes.

JUDGMENT :

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.

1. The present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the Petitioner seeking appointment of the Respondent's nominee Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes that have arisen between the Petitioner and the Respondent in relation to the Request for Proposal bearing No.RFP/RJ-ON-90/1/2023/1 dated 28.12.2022 ("RFP") and the Gas Sales Agreement ("GSA").

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to filing of the present petition are as follows:

a) It is stated that an Oil & Gas Block in Barmer, Rajasthan i.e., RJ-ON-90/1 Block ("Gas Block"), was awarded by the Government of India to a Joint Venture comprising of various entities namely Cairn Energy Hydrocarbons Limited and, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited and the Petitioner herein (collectively referred to as Contractors).

b) Thereafter, the Government of India entered into a Production Sharing Contract ("PSC") with the Joint Venture for the Oil & Gas Block. It is stated that the Petitioner is the Operator of the Gas Block and is authorised to act on behalf of the Joint Venture.

c) On 28.12.2022, the Petitioner issued a Notice Inviting Offers along with the Request for Proposal ("RFP") and a Gas Sales Agreement (GSA) inviting offers from companies interested to offtake all or portion of gas volumes available for sale from the Gas Block. It is stated that the Clause 18 of the GSA contains an Arbitration Clause.

d) As per the requirement in the Bid Process on e-Tendering Portal i.e., Mjunction, the Respondent uploaded a signed copy of the GSA and the RFP on 12.01.2023. It is stated that in addition to the above documents, the Respondent also uploaded signed Forms C1 & C6. It is pertinent to mention that the stand of the Respondent is that the Respondent has only initialled the pages and has not signed the pages for a valid contract.

e) On 18.01.2023 the bidding was closed, and the Respondent emerged as one of the successful bidders and was allocated the single highest quantity of gas. On the very same day the Respondent was sent an email by Mjunction on behalf of the Petitioner intimating the Respondent about the results of the Bidding Process and also informing the Respondents about the quantity of Gas allocated to the Respondent as determined in terms of Clause 4.2 of the RFP.

f) Subsequently an email dated 19.01.2023 was sent by the Petitioner to the Respondent wherein a fresh copy of the filled up and signed GSA was attached for formal signing in terms of Clause 1.3.3 of the RFP. Several reminder emails dated 20.01.2023, 27.01.2023, 01.02.2023, 10.02.2023, 17.02.2023 and 22.02.2023 were also sent to the Respondents regarding the same. However, no response or objection was raised by the Respondent.

g) On 27.02.2023, a Letter bearing No. COM/RJ/GSPC/2023/12 was sent by the Petitioner to the Respondent wherein it was stated that the Respondent has emerged as the largest buyer of Gas from the Gas Block in the Auction Process and has been allocated gas volume of 1,907,543 scm/day. It is further stated that both the parties reached an agreement regarding the terms and conditions as laid in the GSA post which the Petitioner had shared the signed copy of the Final GSA on 27.01.2023 and countersigned scanned GSA is awaited from the Respondent.

h) Vide email dated 27.02.2023 sent by the Respondent, the Petitioner was informed that on account of unforeseeable and adverse material changes in the natural gas market due to continuous fall in gas prices, it is not feasible for the Res