- (1.) This revisional application is directed against an order No. 21 dated December 15, 2009 passed by the learned Judge, 12th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 980 of 2007 by which an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997 is allowed. The Plaintiff Company who is basically engaged in a business of iron and steel decided to diversify its business for manufacturing and marketing of the fishing nets. The defendants/opposite parties are dealing in a machines meant for the purpose of manufacturing the fishing nets and were approached by the plaintiff/petitioner to submit the quotation containing the specification, rates and others terms and conditions. Admittedly, the quotation was submitted on October 26, 2005 by the defendant no.1/ opposite party no.1 which was duly accepted by putting the signature by the plaintiff/petitioner. It would be relevant to quote the said quotation letter dated October 26, 2005 which reads thus: JUDGEMENT_592_CALLT1_2013_1.html
(2.) According to the plaintiff/petitioner, although, the said offer was accepted and confirmed but a cheque for a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- as a by way of advanced deposit was also forwarded to the opposite party no.1, in spite of the same, the supply of machine could not be made within the agreed period for which the plaintiff/petitioner cancelled the said contract and demanded the refund of the advanced deposit together with an interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The opposite party no.1 having failed to pay the said advanced deposit despite the cancellation of the said agreement, the plaintiff/petitioner filed a Title Suit No. 980 of 2007 before the City Civil Court, Calcutta for a decree of declaration that the cancellation of contract dated October 26, 2005 is valid and legal and the defendant/opposite party have no right to forfeit the sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- so advanced and further prayed for a decree for a sum of Rs. 4,62,250/-.
(3.) The defendant/opposite party filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for referring the disputes to a named arbitrator under the Contract as the parties have decided to resolve the dispute by arbitration. The bone of contention in the said application is that the general conditions of sale of the defendant no.1 contains an arbitration clause and the letter of quotation dated October 26, 2005 clearly stipulates that the said offer is subject to the general conditions of sale and, therefore, there exist a valid arbitration agreement and the dispute should be referred to an arbitration as the Civil Court's Jurisdiction is barred.;