SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 1777

K. G. BALAKRISHNAN, P. SATHASIVAM, J. M. PANCHAL
Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply Transport Undertaking – Appellant
Versus
Laqshya Media P. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G. E. Vahanvati, Sol. Genl. of India, Harish N. Salve, K. K. Venugopal, Mukul Rohtagi, Pravin H. Parekh, Sr. Advs., Krishan Kumar, M.T. Nair, Mukesh Kumar, Mohd. Yasir Abbasi (for Mis. M. V. Kini & Associates), Maninder Singh, Mrs. Pratibha M. Singh, Garuav Sharma, Kamaldeep Dayal, Sumeet Bhatia, Ms. Surbhi Mehta, K. Datta, Manish Srivastava, Sudhir Nandrajog, Rarnesh P. Yadav, Ms. Pooja Dhar, Ashish Venna, Sarneer Parekh, Sumeet Lall, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohtagi, Mrs. Shakun Shanna, Ms. Yashodhara Anand, Ms. Deekhsha Rai, Ashish Vaid (for Mis. Parekh & Co.), Sameer Parekh, Mrs. Asha G. Nair (NP), Advs., with them for the appearing parties.

JUDGMENT

P. Sathasivam, J.—

1) Leave granted.

2) All these appeals are directed against the final order and judgment dated 19.11.2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No. 1344 of 2007 whereby the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by Laqshya Media Private Limited and Alok Jalan of Mumbai and set aside the work orders/contracts awarded to Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd.- Respondent No. 4 and Prithvi Associates- Respondent No. 5 by the Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply & Transport Undertaking (hereinafter referred to as the “BEST”) in respect of Bus Queue Shelters and directed the BEST to invite fresh tenders as required under Section 460M of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (in short “MMC Act”). Aggrieved by the said order, the BEST has filed S.L.P.(C) No. 363 of 2009, Prithvi Associates has filed S.L.P.(C) No. 426 of 2009 and Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. has filed S.L.P. (C) No. 510 of 2009. Since all the appeals question the correctness of the very same order of the High Court, they are being disposed of by the following common order.

3) For convenience, let us refer the parties as arrayed in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 363 of 2























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top