BOEING COMPANY Vs. R M INVESTMENT AND TRADING CO PVT LTD
LAWS(CAL)-1994-8-24
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on August 09,1994

BOEING COMPANY Appellant
VERSUS
R.M.INVESTMENT AND TRADING CO. PVT. LTD. Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

HOTEL PARAS GARDEN VS. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(BOM)-2015-6-18] [REFERRED TO]
TATA CHEMICALS LTD VS. KSHITISH BARDHAN CHUNILAL NATH AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2019-7-95] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Chief Justice- R.M. Investment & Trading Company Private Limited (briefly stated as 'R.M.I.') the plaintiff-respondent was the Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. In and around 1986, R.M.I. entered into an agreement with Boeing Company (for short "Boeing"), a company incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, United States of America. R.M.I. agreed to provide consultant services for promotion of sale of Boeing Aircraft in India. The said agreement was initially agreed to be operative till December 31, 1986 but subsequently the agreement was extended till April 30, 1987. In August 1987, definitive purchase agreement to purchase two Aircrafts was executed between Boeing and Air India, a body corporate under the Air Corporation Act, 1953. R.M.I. claimed commission from Boeing on the said transaction but Boeing refused to pay the same. In April 1970, R.M.I. filed suit No. 363 of 1970 on the Original Side of the Calcutta High Court against Boeing for recovery of U.S. $ 17.5 Million by way of compensation and remuneration on the basis of the terms of Consultant Services Agreement along with other incidental reliefs.
(2.)The Consultant Services Agreement provided that subject to the limitation of paragraph 3, the Consultant shall use Consultant's best efforts to promote the Sale (as defined in paragraph 2.2) of Aircraft to Customers.
(3.)Clause 10.2 of the agreement provided :
"10.2. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or any breach thereof, which the parties have not been able with due diligence to settle amicably, shall be settled by arbitration con-ducted in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Any such arbitration proceedings shall be conducted in the English language in Seattle, Washington, USA by three arbitrators. Any award of the arbitrators shall be final, binding upon both parties, and enforceable in any court having competent jurisdiction".



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.