Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
G.S.SANDHAWALIA, C.J, JIYA LAL BHARDWAJ
Zenith-Event & Services – Appellant
Versus
State of HP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners complied with tender terms fully (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. encroachment warrants contractual penalty (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. no notice violated natural justice (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. state action requires hearing opportunity (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. audi alteram partem in forfeitures mandatory (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. arbitrary forfeiture quashed refund ordered (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.
Petitioner No. 1, which is a partnership firm, duly registered with the Directorate of Industries, Government of Himachal Pradesh who by the medium of the instant petition, seeks quashing of impugned orders having endorsement dated 09.02.2024 (Annexure P-14) and impugned action/order of respondents No. 2 and 3 forfeiting the performance security and earnest money as contained in the noting sheet and further to release the earnest money/security amount deposited by the petitioners in compliance of the terms and conditions of notice inviting tender dated 12.09.2023 published in daily newspaper, i.e., The Tribune dated 13.09.2023 (Annexure P-4). By virtue of the impugned orde
Forfeiture of tender security for alleged breach requires show-cause notice and hearing under natural justice, even in contracts; post-event inquiry without prior opportunity during occupation render....
Tender bid valid 180 days from submission; post-expiry forfeiture of EMD and debarment invalid without extension. Debarment requires prior show cause notice per natural justice principles.
(1) Breach of reciprocal contractual obligations – A commercial document ought not to be interpreted in a manner that arrives at a complete variance with what may originally have been intention of pa....
Banning orders require proof beyond reasonable doubt of misconduct; otherwise, natural justice demands adherence to procedural fairness, especially in cases invoking penalties like forfeiture.
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice, ruling that no one should be condemned unheard, and set aside the forfeiture of the Earnest Money Deposit.
The demand for misc. expenses, development charges, and lease money was illegal and non est in law as the Guidelines governing the auction did not authorize the respondent-Board to realize these amou....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
