MIS YOUNG ACHIEVERS v. IMS LEARNING RESOURCES PVT. LTD

1.2. It is the common case of the parties that the subsequent agreement titled "Exit paper/agreement" C dated 01.02.2011 entered into between the parties does not contain any arbitration clause. The Exit paper would clearly indicate that it is a mutually agreed document containing comprehensive terms and conditions which admittedly does not contain an arbitration clause. The High Court is right in taking the view that the case on D hand, is not a case involving assertion by the respondent of according a satisfaction in respect of the earlier contracts dated 01.04.2007 and 01.04.2010. If that be so, it could have referred to arbitrator in terms of those two agreements going by the dictum in the case Kishorilal E Gupta. This Court in Kishorilal Gupta's case laid down the principle that if the contract is superseded by another, the arbitration clause, being a component part of the earlier contract, falls with it. But where the dispute is whether such contract is void ab intio, the arbitration clause F cannot operate on those disputes, for its operative force depends upon the existence of the contract and its validity. [Paras 7, 8] [258-A-B; 259-H; 260-A-D]

1.3. So far as the present case is concerned, parties G have entered into a fresh contract contained in the Exit paper which does not even indicate any disputes arising under the original contract or about the settlement thereof, it is nothing but a pure and simple novation of the original contract by mutual consent. Above being the H 254 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 8 S.C.R. A factual and legal position, no error is found in the view taken by the High Court. [Para 9] [260-F-H]