IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
JUSTICE, J
Petitioner (Partnership Firm) – Appellant
Versus
3rd Respondent (Tender Authority) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments regarding compliance requirements. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's analysis on tender document requirements. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. judicial reasoning against arbitrary interpretations. (Para 6) |
J UDGMENT
Petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the business of executing civil contract works. In response to Ext.P1 e-tender notice published by the 3rd respondent, inviting tenders for construction of railway tunnel between Nemam and Neyyattinkara Stations as part of doubling of railway track between Thiruvananthapuram and Kanyakumari, petitioner constituted a Joint Venture with a private limited company named Velji Ratna Sorathia Infra Pvt.Ltd. and submitted its bid. Petitioner, being the lead partner, the bid documents were signed by the Managing Partner, as authorised by the other member of the Joint Venture and partners of the petitioner firm. Later, petitioner received Ext.P10 e.mail, informing that its techno-commercial bid was found technically unsuitable since certificates in Forms XVA/XVIA were not submitted by all partners of the petitioner firm. Immediately, petitioner submitted Ext.P11 objection-cum-representation stating that Form XVA is not included in the b
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.