Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.83 seconds)The Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005
Balaji Ventures Pvt. Ltd. vs Maharashtra State Power Generation ... on 11 February, 2022
In the matter of Balaji Ventures Pvt. Ltd. vs
Maharashtra State Power Generation
Company Ltd. and Anr. decided in Special
Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 1616 & 1673 of
2022, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the
tendering authority should always have the
freedom to prescribe the eligibility criteria and/or
the terms and conditions of the bid. Unless such
conditions were found to be arbitrary, mala fide
5
and/or tailor made, the bidder/tenderer should
not be permitted to challenge the bid
condition/clause, which did not suit him and/or
was not convenient to him.
Airport Authority Of India vs Centre For Aviation Policy, Safety And ... on 30 September, 2022
In the matter of Airport Authority of India v. Centre for
Aviation Policy, Safety & Research (CAPSR), reported in 2022
SCC OnLine SC 1334, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows:-
The Silppi Constructions Contractors vs Union Of India on 21 June, 2019
"20. The essence of the law laid down in
the judgments referred to above is the
exercise of restraint and caution; the need
for overwhelming public interest to justify
judicial intervention in matters of contract
involving the State instrumentalities; the
courts should give way to the opinion of
the experts unless the decision is totally
arbitrary or unreasonable; the court does
not sit like a court of appeal over the
appropriate authority; the court must
realise that the authority floating the
tender is the best judge of its requirements
and, therefore, the court's interference
6
should be minimal. The authority which
floats the contract or tender, and has
authored the tender documents is the best
judge as to how the documents have to be
interpreted. If two interpretations are
possible then the interpretation of the
author must be accepted. The courts will
only interfere to prevent arbitrariness,
irrationality, bias, mala fides or perversity.
With this approach in mind we shall deal
with the present case."
Montecarlo Ltd vs Ntpc Ltd on 18 October, 2016
In the decision of Montecarlo Limited vs. National Thermal
Power Corporation Limited, reported in (2016) 15 SCC 272, the
Hon'ble Apex Court held that the tender inviting authority was the
best person to understand and appreciate its requirements. The
tendering authority had the freedom to enter into contracts.
.
M/S Michigan Rubber(I) Ltd vs State Of Karnataka & Ors on 17 August, 2012
In the matter of Michigan Rubber (India) Ltd. v. State of
Karnataka and Ors., reported in (2012) 8 SCC 216, the Hon'ble
Apex Court held as follows:-
Maa Binda Express Carrier And Anr vs Northeast Frontier Railway And Ors on 29 November, 2013
In the matter of Maa Binda Express Carrier v. North-East
Frontier Railway, reported in (2014) 3 SCC 760, the Hon'ble Apex
Court held as follows:-
1