IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
Ahanthembimol Singh, J.
M/s. Gaikhonlung Panmei - Appellant
Versus
The Food Corporation of India Through The Chairman And Managing Director & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 411 of 2020
Decided On : 31-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts related to the tender process. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments on forfeiture clause and contract violations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis of contract existence and forfeiture. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT ORDER
1. Heard Mr. N. Gunedhor, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. W. Darakishwor, learned senior panel counsel appearing for the respondents.
The present writ petition had been filed challenging the legality and sustainability of the order dated 29.06.2020 issued by the authority of the FCI thereby disqualifying the tender bids submitted by the petitioner's firm and forfeiting the EMD amounting to Rs. 20,80,512/-(Rupees Twenty Lakh eighty thousand five hundred and twelve only) and also black listing the petitioner's firm for a period of three years from participating in FCI tenders.
2. The legal question which has arisen is whether, upon there being a material non-disclosure or a material concealment, the forfeiture clause under Clause No. 13 of the General Information to tenderer can be invoked thereby resulting in issuance of the impugned order.
3. The relevant facts of the present case in a nutshell is that the FCI issued a notice dated 21.02.2020 inviting E-Tenders from eligible and interested contractors for appointment of contractor for transportation of food grains and alike materials, etc, from FSD/CWC, Dimapur to FSDBishnupur for a period of two years.
Along with the said NIT, a comprehensive General Information to tenderers containing altogether 15 Clauses was also notified. Under Clause (4) of the said General Information, the conditions for disqualification are given. One of the conditions for disqualification as provided under Clause (4) (III) is that tenderer whose Earnest Money Deposit and /or Security Deposit had been forfeited by the FCI or any Department of Central or State Government or any other public sector undertaking, during the last five years, will be, ineligible. UnderCaluse (6) of the said General Information, it is provided that each tender must be accompanied by an earnest money @ 2% value of the contract amounting to Rs. 20,80,512/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh, Eighty Thousand Five Hundred and Twelve Only). Under Clause (11) of the said General Information, it is provided that Food Corporation of India reserved the right to reject any or all tenders without assigning any reason and that the successful tenderer will be intimated of the acceptance of his tender by letter/telegram/fax/e-mail. Under Clause (13) of the said General Information, it is provided that if the information given by the tenderer in the Tender Document and its Annexures and Appendices is found to be false/incorrect or has violated/breached any of the terms conditions of the contract, at any stage, FCI shall have the right to disqualify/summarily terminate the contract, forfeit the Earnest Money Deposit/SD/BG, make good any other loses cause to the corporation and black list the party for three years without prejudice to any other rights that the Corporation may have under contract and law.
4. Pursuant to the said NIT, the petitioner's firm submitted its tender bids along with a forwarding letter marked as Appendices-II and a Tender Submission Undertaking dated 13.03.2020.In the said forwarding letter, the petitioner stated that he had thoroughly examined and understood all the terms conditions as contained in the Tender Document, invitation to tender/information to tender and its annexure and appendices and agreed to abid by them and that he had deposited EMD amounting to Rs. 20,80,512/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Eighty Thousand Five Hundred and Twelve Only). In the said letter, the petitioner also made a declaration that no Earnest Money Deposit and/or Security Deposit had been forfeited or adjusted against any compensation payable, in a case of any contract entered into by him with the Food Corporation of India for any other public sector undertaking or any Government during the las
Kailash Nath Associates vs. Delhi Development Authority &Anr.
MBL Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Rites Ltd.
National Highway Authority of India vs. Ganga Enterprises and Another
Forfeiture of earnest money is valid before contract execution if tenderer provides false information, without invoking Sections 73 and 74 of the Contract Act.
Forfeiture of earnest money is justified for willful suppression of material facts in tender process; disclosure obligations extend beyond quality-related matters; Section 74 of Indian Contract Act d....
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.
Forfeiture of bid security must be explicitly stipulated in the contract terms, and failure to bid higher does not equate to withdrawal from the bidding process.
Forfeiture of Earnest Money requires intent to mislead; accidental clerical errors should not disqualify bidders nor invoke punitive measures, affirming principles of natural justice.
A successful bidder cannot be penalized for inadvertent documentation errors, and forfeiture of earnest money requires proof of intent to mislead, reflecting principles of natural justice.
The main legal point established is that in contractual matters, the court may intervene to prevent arbitrariness or favoritism by the government bodies, especially if the actions violate the equalit....
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.