Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Article 21-A Cannot Be Held Hostage to Transfer Preferences: Allahabad High Court Upholds Teacher Redeployment to Enforce Pupil–Teacher Ratio Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contract Or Travel Beyond Pleadings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes ₹5.18 Crore Award Director’ in GeM Clause 29 Does Not Mean ‘Independent Director’: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Technical Disqualification Section 25(3) Is Sacrosanct – Removal of a Trademark Cannot Rest on a Defective Notice: Delhi High Court Not Every Broken Promise Is Rape: Delhi High Court Draws Clear Line Between ‘Suspicion’ and ‘Grave Suspicion’ in False Promise to Marry Case Section 37 Is Not A Second Appeal On Merits: Delhi High Court Refuses To Re-Appreciate Evidence In Challenge To Arbitral Award Recovery After Retirement Is Clearly Impermissible: Bombay High Court Shields Retired Teacher From ₹2.80 Lakh Salary Recovery Paying Tax Does Not Legalise Illegality: Bombay High Court Refuses to Shield Alleged Unauthorized Structure Beneficial Pension Scheme Cannot Be Defeated By Cut-Off Dates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs EPFO To Follow Sunil Kumar B. Guidelines On Higher Pension Claims Equity Aids the Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Over Their Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Revive 36-Year-Old Pay Parity Claim Students Cannot Be Penalised For Legislative Invalidity: Supreme Court Protects Degrees Granted Before 2005 Yash Pal Verdict Restructuring Without Fulfilment of Conditions Cannot Defeat Insolvency: Supreme Court Reaffirms Default as the Sole Trigger Under Section 7 IBC Section 100-A CPC Slams The Door On Intra-Court Appeals In RERA Matters”: Allahabad High Court Declares Special Appeal Not Maintainable Mental Distance Between ‘May Be’ and ‘Must Be’ Is Long: Patna High Court Acquits Six in Murder Case Built on Broken Chain of Circumstances Where Corruption Takes Roots, Rule of Law Is Replaced by Rule of Transaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar Mere Voter List and Corrected SSC Certificate Cannot Prove Paternity: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects 21-Year-Old Bid for DNA Test in Partition Appeal Section 147 NI Act Makes Offence Compoundable At Any Stage: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Concurrent Convictions in Cheque Bounce Case After Settlement Bald Allegations of Adultery Based on Suspicion Cannot Dissolve a Marriage: Jharkhand High Court Once a Document Is Admitted in Evidence, Its Stamp Defect Cannot Be Reopened: Madras High Court

Delhi High Court Dismisses Appeals Alleging Collusion in Bidding Process

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Delhi, India – In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court dismissed appeals filed by NTPC Ltd, a leading power company, alleging collusion in the bidding process. The court ruled that the allegations of collusion between Emami Power Ltd and Oriental Sales Agencies (India) were baseless and lacked evidence. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Najmi Waziri and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, emphasized the need for concrete proof to establish collusion.

The court stated, "The Impugned order has rightly held, indeed it was conceded by the appellant, that Emami and OSAPL were not group companies; there was nothing on the record to establish that the two companies which are otherwise independent and separate entities, could be said to have colluded or otherwise conspired to cause any monetary loss or injury or impediment in the affairs of the appellant.”

Furthermore, the court rejected the appellant’s contention that Emami and OSAPL had caused harm to NTPC Ltd, as no loss was proven to have been suffered by the appellant. The appeals were dismissed, and the court ordered the release of the deposited monies to Emami Power Ltd and Oriental Sales Agencies (India) along with any accrued interest.

Highlighting the interpretation of the Request for Selection (RFS), the court noted, “The impugned order has rightly held that Emami and OSAPL are not group companies… The shareholding pattern and economic interests are irrelevant once non-affiliation is established.”

The judgment emphasized the importance of evidence and pleadings to support allegations, stating, “There are no pleadings to support the contentions… these contentions are wholly bereft of any merit.”

Decided on: 12.05.2023

NTPC LTD  VS  EMAMI POWER LTD & ANR             

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/NTPCL-VS-EMAMI-POWER-12-MAY-DHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News