Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

23. The aforesaid submission of the counsel appearing for the petitioner are refuted by the counsel appearing for the respondent by drawing my attention to the various correspondences between the parties and also to the alleged arbitration agreement between the parties. My attention was drawn to the fact that the copy of the alleged charter party agreement relied upon and signed by the petitioner, was received by the respondent on 29.6.1995 i.e. after six months of the contract had been p reformed . By making a reference to the same it was contended by the counsel appearing for the respondent that the clause appearing therein cannot be said to be the arbitration agreement between the parties. It was contended that the terms and conditions mentioned in the said charter party agreement were never agreed and settled. In fact, the said charter party agreement does not contain the signature of the respondent . The same appears to be an unsigned document by the respondent and, therefore, it cannot be prima facie said that the terms and conditions contained in the various clauses therein were discussed and settled and agreed upon between the parties. The said charter party agreement also is also subsequent to the date performance of the contract. In the present case the petitioner is relying upon the terms and conditions in the charter party agreement, which is subsequent to the date of the performance and execution of the contract. The respondent has denied he existence of any signed charter party or arbitration agreement.