(1.) This is an application by the defendant for stay of this suit under the provisions of the Arbitration Act. An interim order for stay was made by Gentle J., on 12-11-1946 pending the hearing of this application.
(2.) On 17-2-1943 the plaintiff company made a tender for the supply of meat for troops and hospitals in a certain area in Eastern Command between 1-4-1943 and 31-3-1944 subject to the conditions and stipulations specified in the said tender and in the "instructions to tenderers." The said tender was duly accepted and the contract was sanctioned by Q.M.G. in India. On 15-3-1943 the plaintiff company made another tender for the supply of meat, live goat and sheep in a certain area in Eastern Command between 1-5-1943 to 31-3-1944 subject to similar terms. This tender was also duly accepted and the contract was sanctioned by Q.M.G. in India. In each case the instructions to tenderers, the tender and the acceptance constituted the contract between the parties.
(3.) In some of the clauses of the printed forms of "instructions to tenderers" and in the "tender" there are certain blank spaces with certain marks. There are notes at the foot of the forms indicating how those spaces are to be filted in. Thus in Clause 12 of the "instructions to tenderers" there is a blank space with a double dagger mark. The footnote indicates that that apace is meant to be filled in by setting forth "The officer who sanctions the contract, as specified in Financial Regulations, India, Part 1." Likewise in Clause 1 of the tender there is a blank space with an asterisk mark. The footnote shows that that space is to be filled in by setting forth "The officer sanctioning the contracts". In each of the forms of "Instructions to Tenderers" and of "Tender" which have been filled in and which form part of the two contracts between the parties the words "Q.M.G., in India" appear to have been inserted in Clause 12 of the former and in Clause 1 of the latter.