Case Law Details
Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mohit Raghuram Hegde Proprietor Creative Infotech (Bombay High Court)
Conclusion: In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held that mere valid arbitration clause exist in “terms and conditions” as mentioned in the website and mere allegation of fraud would not vitiate the constitution of arbitral tribunal.
Facts: In present facts of the case, the application was filed before Hon’ble Bombay High Court under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, whereby the applicant has prayed for appointment of an arbitral tribunal to adjudicate the disputes and differences between the parties, which have arisen under a Contract for supply inter alia of the computer products, communication device etc. The disputes have arisen between the parties as regards non-payment of applicant’s dues under various invoices as issued by the applicant to the respondent. It is in these circumstances, the applicant has invoked arbitration and has prayed for appointment of an arbitral tribunal. The applicant’s case was that the arbitration agreement was contained in the “Sales terms and conditions” as accepted by the respondent, which according to the applicant has been consciously accepted by the respondent. It is the case of the applicant that a standard business procedure is followed by the applicant in entering into contracts with all its customers like the respondent. It is stated that the respondent accepting such procedure had executed a KYC form as prescribed by the applicant.
The Respondent contended that the said case is entirely vitiated by fraud as there is no arbitration agreement between the parties. It is submitted that the fraud would vitiate everything and thus, the arbitration agreement as alleged by the applicant ought not to be recognized and an arbitrator ought not to be appointed. The primary contention was that the purchase orders are fake, as they are issued by the employee of the respondent against whom an FIR has been lodged, as also the invoices are issued by the employee of the applicant and hence there is no transaction between the applicant and respondent in relation to the invoices on the basis of which a claim is being made by the applicant against the respondent.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that if this be the factual position and placing of purchase orders and raising of invoices itself is on the basis of the contract as entered between the parties, the contract being the respondent agreeing to the terms and conditions as specified by the applicant in the KYC form as filled by the respondent, under which the respondent has agreed and accepted the terms and conditions of sales, as published on the applicant’s website which interalia contained an arbitration clause under Clause 10 which stood accepted by the respondent, the moment the respondent signed the declaration accepting the sales terms and conditions. It would be required to be observed that such actions on the part of the parties which recognizes elements of contemporary “e-business” certainly are required to be given a due meaning. Apart from above contractual position between the parties, the invoices which were issued by the applicant on the respondent also contained an arbitration clause.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
