Chennai: It's not just Pakistan's military, police and intelligence agencies which assault Indian diplomats. Apparently, even officials of Bank Artha Graha, Jakarta, a bank closely related to the Indonesian military, dare to assault officials of the Indian consul there.

In a startling disclosure, city-based banking software company Polaris Software Lab has said Gautam De, an official of the Indian mission in Indonesia, was physically assaulted and pushed down the stairs by Anton Hudyana, president-director, Bank Artha Graha, and his underlings.

De had visited the bank's headquarters to check on the safety of Polaris officials who were unlawfully detained there.

A four-member Polaris team lead by its CEO and chairman Arun Jain and vice-presidents Rajeev Malhotra, Rajiv Arora and Chander Singh had gone to Indonesia to sort out a commercial dispute with the bank.

The four were detained at the bank's headquarters for several hours before they were taken to the police station. The Jakarta police, in turn, jailed Jain and Malhotra for nearly a week.

According to Polaris, the Indian embassy had lodged a complaint with the local police. The Chennai company issued its statement on 25 February 2003, six days after the Indonesian bank broke its two-month studied silence on the imbroglio.

The bank's account On 19 February 2003, the bank refuting Polaris's allegations said it encountered problems in the implementation of BankWare, the Indian company's core banking solution. According to the bank, Polaris initially stated that its banking solution would go 'live' within four months of commencement of work in January 2001.

Later realising that the four-month timeline could not be met, the bank reformulated the timelines and strategies in November 2001, full 11 months after signing the letter of intent with Polaris.

''One crucial milestone in the agreements is for system integration testing (SIT). Based on a 'change order; requested by Polaris, this was delayed from the initial date of 5 June 2002 to 6 July 2002. In short, Polaris was unable to carry out SIT on 6 July 2002. The software delivered by Polaris purportedly for SIT carried numerous bugs and errors,'' the bank alleged.

According to the bank, despite repeated requests, these bugs and errors not only could not be removed but also increased incrementally as time went on.

''Polaris consistently failed to provide a stable environment for SIT. In a four-month period from June 2002 to September 2002, five different dates were promised by Polaris's senior management for SIT commencement. None of these dates were met,'' the bank added.

According to the bank, on 29 August 2002, it issued a notice of default to Polaris with 30 days to remedy the default. By the end of September 2002, Polaris was still unable to commence SIT and eradicate the bugs and errors.

Upon the personal request of Polaris chief Jain, the bank agreed to commence SIT on 28 October 2002. As Polaris couldn't meet the revised deadline, on 27 November 2002, Bank Artha Graha terminated the contract and claimed refund of $6.62 lakh paid to Polaris and also damages for breach of contract.

With termination notice on their lap Polaris officials contacted the bank to set up a meeting with Jain who was willing to visit Jakarta and meet the bank's senior management. Initially reluctant to host such a meeting, the bank subsequently agreed due to persistent requests from Polaris.

According to the bank, on 13 December 2002, Jain categorically refused to give Hudyana any performance bond or a bank guarantee if Polaris were allowed to continue with the project. Faced with a deadlock, the bank later lodged a police complaint to investigate the matter.

What Polaris says now Reacting to the Indonesian bank's assertions, Polaris in a statement alleges that the bank failed to pay its dues under contract. ''The software implementation project was supposed to have been completed only in July 2003 and not ''go live in four months of commencement of work in January 2001.''

Despite failing to make scheduled payments amounting to $4,40,633 - non-payment since 25 April 2002 - Bank Artha Graha sought to terminate the contract prematurely in November 2002. While agreeing that the bank had sent the contract termination notice, Polaris disputes the bank's capacity to do so, without elaborating further on that stance.

As the dispute is under arbitration at Singapore's International Arbitration Centre, Polaris states that it would not like to comment further on the nature of contract. However, Polaris claims that it was Bank Artha Graha's Hudyana who had sent a personal mail to Jain inviting the latter's personal attendance on 28 November 2002 after terminating the contract.

Content with scoring brownie points Be that as it may, one wonders what Polaris is trying to achieve by trying to score some brownie points debating on who invited whom, forgetting the long-term impact of such statements.

Shorn of the detention episode, the dispute is all about the promises made by a service provider (Polaris) and a customer (Bank Artha Graha) and the former's failure to fulfil its promises.

A statement emphasising or quibbling that it was Hudyana who invited Jain for a personal meeting after notice of contract termination does not exactly show Polaris in a good light.

Is it not normal for a customer to expect service from the service provider or asking for a meeting with the CEO when matters were not proceeding satisfactorily? After all, the bank had paid $6.62 lakh out of the total contract value of $13 lakh without seeing positive results.

Surely, a million-dollar question.