Salil Kumar Roy Chowdhury, J. - (1.)This is an application for setting aside an award dated December 3, 1966, made by the Indian Chamber of Commerce, Calcutta, and also for supersession of the reference and an order be passed that the arbitration agreement shall cease to have effect with regard to the disputes referred.
(2.)The facts of the case are: By exchange of bought and sold notes through broker dated July 26, 1965, the Petitioner agreed to purchase and the Respondent agreed to sell and deliver 500 tins of 17 kg. gross weight each of K.M.P. brand cocoanut oil packed in new tins at the rate of Rs. 530 per quintal F.O.R. Calcutta. A copy of the said contract, produced by the Respondent before the Tribunal of Arbitration, Indian Chamber of Commerce, is set out hereunder:
KALURAM MAHADEO PRASAD

1, Madan Mohan Burman Street,

Calcutta -7

Dated 26.7.65

Contract No. ... MALABAR/64 -65.

Messrs. Niranjanlal Ratankumar, Fancy Bazar, Gauhati, Assam.

Dear Sirs, We confirm having sold to you the following articles as per details below through Broker Shri Pannalal Jain.

Article .... Pure Malabar Cocoanut Oil.

Quantity .... 500 (five hundred) tins of 17 kg. gross wt. each.

Quality ... K.M.P. brand, packed in new tins.

Rate ... Rs. 520 (Rupees five hundred twenty) per qt. F.O.R. Calcutta.

Delivery ... To be completed by August 1965 subject to available of booking by Steamer.

Payment .... 100% payment through Bank at Gauhati.

Sales tax .... 2% C.S. Tax extra and 'C' Form will be given to Bank.

Remarks ... Any other terms as usual.

Arbitration Clause ... All disputes whatsoever arising out of this contract shall have to be referred to the Tribunal of Arbitration of the 'Indian Chamber of Commerce', Calcutta, and their decision in the matter of Arbitration, shall be binding on both the parties of the contract.

For Niranjanlal Ratankumar

Yours faithfully,

For & on behalf of Kaluram Mahadeo Prasad

Sd/ - Illegible Partner

Sd/ - Illegible Buyer

Pannalal Broker

(3.)It appears that the original Tribunal of Arbitration in the said contract, three copies of which were produced before the Tribunal of Arbitration, Indian Chamber of Commerce, - -one submitted by the Petitioner, one produced from the custody of the Respondent and the third one produced by the broker Pannalal Jain. It is an admitted case that the original Tribunal of Arbitration, as set out in the arbitration clause of the contract, was 'East India Oil Millers Association'. In all the copies it appears that the said original Tribunal of Arbitration is over -written with the words 'Indian Chamber of Commerce', but in the copy produced by the Respondent besides the over -writing it is also written in the margin as 'Indian Chamber of Commerce'. All the alterations in the three copies of the contract are initialled.