Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (2.73 seconds)
Documents citing Monnet Power Company Limted vs Union Of India & Others on 9 March, 2017

Mandakini Joshi vs Prasar Bharati, M/O Information And ... on 15 September, 2023

16. This Tribunal would, therefore, be of the considered opinion that the applicant has not been able to successfully establish any violation of the principle of natural justice or procedural justice in the conduct of the proceedings by the Internal Complaints Committee. Further, the respondents have acted as per the provisions of rule 14 (2) and Rule 26 O.A. No. 290/00310/2017 - Mandakini Joshi Vs. UOI & Ors.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Jodhpur Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Essar Power M.P. Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 15 April, 2019

5. Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Mr. Neeraj K. Kaul and Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners, placed considerable reliance upon the judgment of this Court dated 09.03.2017 in Monnet Power Company Ltd. v. Union of India and connected matters, reported in (2017) 239 DLT 10 (DB). They submitted that this Court had held therein that the said notification dated 16.04.2015, issued by the UOI, had drastically altered the conditions of the auction and that the successful bidders were therefore entitled to withdraw from the contracts and to release of the bid security submitted by them without penalty, with restitution of all the amounts that had been paid by them to the respondents and consequent release of the bank guarantees submitted by them. The petitioners claim to be similarly situated as the petitioners in the Monnet Power group of cases and thus entitled to relief in these petitions. The judgment in Monnet Power was challenged by the UOI before the Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 031546-031548 - 2017 (Diary no. 18678/2017), which was dismissed by the order of the Supreme Court dated 09.10.2017.
Delhi High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - P Jalan - Full Document

Hermes Technologies Private Limited vs Union Of India on 22 August, 2022

9. Learned advocate Mr. Dave has relied upon two decisions delivered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Monnet Power Company Limited v. Union of India & Ors., reported in 2016 239 DLT 10 as well as in the case of Vice Chairman & Managing Director, City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd., v. Shishir Realty Private Limited & Ors., reported in 2021 SCC Onlilne SC 1141. But, the present background of facts which are prevailing and the Page 14 of 21 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 23 21:20:02 IST 2022 C/SCA/18145/2021 CAV ORDER DATED: 22/08/2022 undisputed situation reflecting from the impugned order, we see no reason or assistance to the petitioner's case as the backgrounds of facts of the said cases are altogether different.
Gujarat High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - A Kumar - Full Document

Sh. Ashish Jain And Anr. vs Delhi Development Authority on 8 January, 2024

40. Mr. Vachher places reliance on Monnet Power Company Ltd vs. Union of India & Others, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 7399 and states Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMIT ARORA Signing Date:08.01.2024 W.P.(C) 10621/2017 Page 11 of 31 16:23:22 that the rules of the game cannot be changed midway once the bidding process is over and the contract is completed. The Hon‟ble High Court upheld the sanctity of the tender process and observed that the bidders were fully aware of the terms and conditions of the tender / auction at the time of bidding for the same and were aware of the restrictions imposed thereof. The Hon‟ble Court also held that the bidders obviously calculated their costs and benefits whilst bidding for the same.
Delhi High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document

M/S Pawan Hans Limited (Formerly Known ... vs Commissioner Of Trade And Taxes on 19 December, 2024

37. Yet another decision which Mr. Gulati commended for our consideration was that rendered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Transocean Offshore, Intl. Ventures Ltd. vs. UOI11 and which too was a case dealing with the provision of off shore drilling equipment. We deem it apposite to take note of the following exposition of the legal position which stands reflected in paragraphs 42 to 47 and 49 of that judgment:
Delhi High Court Cites 41 - Cited by 0 - Y Varma - Full Document
1