SURYA KANT, JOYMALYA BAGCHI
Kimberley Club Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Joymalya Bagchi, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 07.09.2021 whereby the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench refused to set aside the decision of 1st respondent-Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad [Hereinafter referred to as “1st respondent-Mandi Parishad”] rejecting appellant’s technical bid on the ground that the ‘haisiyat praman patra’ submitted by it had not been issued by District Magistrate.
3. Dispute arose from a tender floated by 1st respondent-Mandi Parishad to let out a banquet hall/terrace lawn for 10 years to the highest bidder. The notice inviting tender [Hereinafter referred to as “NIT”] prescribed a two-stage bidding process comprising a technical bid and a financial bid. The technical bids were to be evaluated first and only bidders meeting the eligibility criteria would qualify for the second stage, where the financial bids were to be evaluated and tender awarded to the highest bidder. One of the conditions, namely Clause 18 in the NIT stated that bidder must submit a ‘haisiyat praman patra’ of minimum Rs.10 crores with the technical bid.
4. Appellant as well as 5th respondent (successful bidder) su
Tata Cellular v. Union of India
Maha Mineral Mining & Benefication Pvt. Ltd. v. Madhya Pradesh Power Generating Co. Ltd. & Anr.
Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr. v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi & Ors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.