-
P.R. TRANSPORT AGENCY V. UNION OF INDIA, AIR 2006 ALL 23
FACTS
- Bharat Coking Coal (BCC) conducted an e-auction for coal allocation.
- P.R. Transport Agency (PRTA) won the bid for 4000 metric tons of coal at Rs. 1,625/- per metric ton.
- BCC communicated bid acceptance to PRTA via email to PRTA's address.
- PRTA deposited Rs. 81.12 Lakhs as payment for the coal as per the terms.
- Despite payment, PRTA failed to deliver the coal.
- BCC, via email, cancelled PRTA's cheque deposit citing technical issues, without disclosing that another bidder's higher bid was not considered due to software malfunction.
ISSUES
- Does the court's territorial jurisdiction extend to entertain PRTA's petition?
- Does the ouster clause in the tender agreement preclude the court's writ jurisdiction?
CONTENTIONS
- PRTA argues that the court has jurisdiction as the communication regarding bid acceptance was received in Uttar Pradesh (U.P.), where PRTA operates.
- BCC contends that the ouster clause limits the court's jurisdiction, including its writ jurisdiction.
COURT REASONING
- The court's jurisdiction is analyzed in light of Section 13(3) of the Information Technology Act, which considers electronic communications intended for specific addresses.
- Since the emails were directed to locations within U.P. (Chamauli and Varanasi), the court asserts jurisdiction as part of the cause of action arose within U.P.
- The ouster clause's applicability is assessed concerning its effect on the court's writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
- While ouster clauses may restrict civil court jurisdiction, they cannot extend to the High Court's writ jurisdiction, unless expressly provided by law.
JUDGEMENT
- The court confirms its jurisdiction, considering the communication's receipt in U.P.
- BCC's cancellation of the bid without affording PRTA due process violated principles of natural justice.
- BCC is directed to fulfill its obligation by delivering the coal to PRTA as per the bid terms.
.