Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.35 seconds)

West Bengal State Electricity Board vs Patel Engineering Co. Ltd. & Ors on 15 January, 2001

The importance of a price, in a contract running into hundreds of crores, cannot be over emphasised. Invariably, anything touching upon the price is a fundamental part of a bid document. It is impermissible in law to make such a non-responsive bid as responsive by withdrawing the condition after opening of the bid documents. See W.B.State Electricity Board Vs. Patel Engineering Company, 2001 (2) SCC 451. In our opinion, once the petitioner's bid is non-responsive in view of what is discussed above, the writ petition is liable to be thrown out by this court on this ground alone as there does not arise any question of the petitioner seeking the relief in such circumstances of it being called for negotiations for award of the contract to it. A non-responsive bid cannot be made responsive by seeking to withdraw the condition after opening of the bid documents. Even assuming that bid documents of other bidders are non-responsive (as alleged to be so of respondent No.4) and the petitioner in view of such non-responsive bids seeks to W.P.(C) No. 3231/2010 Page 9 of 32 make his bid documents comparative/competitive, the same is impermissible in law. A non-responsive bid of another bidder will make such other bidders' bid non-responsive and liable to rejection, but, the same cannot give a valid legal basis to the petitioner to argue that it is entitled to withdraw the FERV condition so as to make its non-responsive bid as responsive.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 342 - S S Quadri - Full Document

Salem Advocate Bar Association,Tamil ... vs Union Of India on 2 August, 2005

In fact the Supreme Court now in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association Vs. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 344 in para 37 has said that it is high time that actual costs must be awarded. We find the present case to be a fit case for award of actual costs to the respondents. We, therefore, in terms of the bill of costs filed award a sum of Rs. 1,07,000/- in favour of the respondents 1 to 3 and against the petitioner. We also award a sum of Rs.5,63,735/- in favour of respondent No.4 and against the petitioner. Costs shall be paid within a period of two weeks.
Supreme Court of India Cites 50 - Cited by 1674 - T Chatterjee - Full Document
1