Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Supreme Court Stresses Limited Judicial Review in Tender Disputes, Cautions Against Unwarranted Challenges

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi, August 23, 2023 - The Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices K.V. Viswanathan and J.K. Maheshwari, delivered a groundbreaking judgement today that underlines the importance of judicious judicial review in tender disputes. The verdict cautions against excessive interference in such matters, particularly by unsuccessful bidders who may seek to exaggerate minor procedural infractions or subjective concerns. The court cited previous rulings that provide guidance on the scope of judicial review in contractual and tender issues. Emphasizing the need to consider factors like arbitrariness, irrationality, and public interest, the judgement lays down clear guidelines for the judiciary's role in tender disputes.

The case in question, titled M/s Om Gurusai Construction Company vs. M/s V.N. Reddy & Ors., revolves around the interpretation of tender conditions and compliance with a specific performance security clause. In addition to addressing the judicial review aspect, the judgement also examined the submission of performance security within a stipulated timeframe and the deference due to an employer's understanding of tender documents.

This decision is poised to set a crucial precedent in the realm of tender-related legal disputes, providing clarity on the limits of judicial interference in tender matters. It is anticipated that the judgement will have a far-reaching impact on the legal landscape surrounding tenders and contractual disputes in India.

The judgement, delivered on August 23, 2023, focused on the interpretation of Clause 2.22.0 (ix) of the tender conditions, which required the submission of additional performance security within a stipulated timeframe. The court considered the effect of bank holidays and employee strikes on compliance and concluded that the appellant had made reasonable efforts to submit the security within the given timeframe. The court cited the legal maxim "Lex non cogit ad impossibilia" (the law does not compel the performance of impossible tasks) in support of its reasoning, emphasizing that compliance with the clause was not feasible due to circumstances beyond the appellant's control.

The court also highlighted the principle of deference to the employer's understanding of tender documents, asserting that courts should generally respect the employer's interpretation unless there is evidence of mala fide or perversity. The judgement emphasized that decision-making authorities, including tendering authorities, are best equipped to understand the requirements of tender documents and the specific circumstances at play.

The Supreme Court's decision set aside the High Court's order that had questioned the acceptance of the appellant's tender and the issuance of the work order. The court directed the dismissal of the writ petition and upheld the appellant's compliance with the tender conditions, asserting that no breach had occurred. The judgement signifies a crucial precedent in the realm of tender-related legal disputes and underscores the necessity of reasonable interpretation and compliance with tender conditions.

The case drew upon legal principles from previous judgements, including Raj Kumar Dey vs. Tarapada Dey, Rosali V. vs. TAICO Bank, and Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Limited, among others.

Date of Decision: August 23, 2023

M/s Om Gurusai Construction Company  vs M/s V.N. Reddy & Ors.       

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/23-Aug-2023_Om_Gyrsai_Construction_Vs_VN_Reddy.pdf"]

Latest Legal News