'Ideally, we would not like to have this contract at all. We do not have this with other countries. We just give an undertaking. The US has it on its statute; so we had to factor in their concerns,' the defence official, who did not want to be identified as he was not authorised to speak to the media, said.

Bhaskar seconded this.

'First of all, the US has to show mala fides on the Indian part,' he said.

A senior Navy official who did not want to be named said that India needed to broaden its options to enhance its military capabilities.

'It makes sense to have options; otherwise the seller will bargain hard with you. With 70 percent of our defence equipment being imported, we cannot afford to have a single vendor and the US is a worthy contender,' he said.

Moreover, India has been giving end user certificates to other countries as well, including Russia, which is analogous to an undertaking against selling the technology of the military equipment to a third party.

'The fact is that it is not the Americans only who want to make sure that the equipments that they provided is not misdirected. Even when the Soviets provided us with military hardware there were certain conditions about transfer of technology and use of those equipments,' Mehta added.

On Wednesday, Defence Minister A.K. Antony defended the measure, saying it was the result of three years of tough efforts and that the government did not have any reservations about it.

'It has been signed after three years of hard bargaining. Everything has been sorted out. We do not have any reservations,' Antony told reporters here.

The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party had staged a walkout in the Lok Sabha Tuesday to protest against the pact, terming it intrusive and saying it should not have been inked without parliament being taken into confidence.

(Ritu Sharma can be contacted at ritu.s@ians.in)