Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: ss.6, 7(4), 7(5) - Arbitration agreement - Whether the parties were ad idem to refer the dispute for arbitration to the Singapore commodity Exchange in the absence of arbitration agreement - Held: An arbitration agreement even though in writing need not be signed by the parties if the record of agreement is provided by exchange of letters, telex, telegrams or other means of telecommunication - s. 7(4)(c) provides that there can be an arbitration agreement in the exchange of statements of claims and defence in which the existence of the agreement is alleged by one party and not denied by the other - If it can be prima facie shown that the parties are at ad idem, then mere fact of one party not signing the agreement cannot absolve himself from the liability under the agreement - Therefore, signature is not a formal requirement u/s. 7(4)(b) or s. 7(4)(c) or u/s. 7(5) of the Act - In the instant case, the intention of the parties is clear from the correspondence regarding their meeting of mind and ad idem to the terms of sale contract which contained the forum of dispute resolution at Singapore Commodity Exchange - Apart from that, after the dispute was referred to Singapore Commodity Exchange for arbitration, the appellant in response to the notice made a counter claim before the Arbitral Tribunal contending that the appellant had incurred huge loss in view of the failure on the part of the respondent to supply the goods in time - By making a counter claim, the appellant indeed submitted to the jurisdiction of the arbitrator.