Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.28 seconds)
Shiva Associates vs The State Of Bihar on 20 January, 2026 cites

Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs The International Airport Authority Of ... on 4 May, 1979

enforce the terms of the tender. If a party approaches a court for an order restraining the employer from strict enforcement of the terms of the tender, the court would decline to do so. It was also reaffirmed that the employer could deviate from the terms and conditions of the tender if the "changes affected all intending applicants alike and were not objectionable". Therefore, deviation from the terms and conditions is permissible so long as the level playing field is maintained and it does not result in any arbitrariness or discrimination in Ramana Dayaram Shetty [Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, (1979) 3 SCC 489] sense.
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 2519 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Nasir Ahmad And Ors. vs King-Emperor on 12 May, 1927

52. There is a wholesome principle that the courts have been following for a very long time and which was articulated in Nazir Ahmad v. King Emperor [Nazir Ahmad v. King Emperor, AIR 1936 PC 253 (2) : (1935-36) 63 IA 372 : 1936 SCC OnLine PC 41] , namely : (SCC OnLine PC) "... where a power is given to do a certain Patna High Court CWJC No.5104 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026 23/26 thing in a certain way the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden."
Allahabad High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 629 - Full Document

Nazir Ahmad vs Emperor (No. 2) on 16 June, 1936

In the present case, clause-5 of the Appendix- V appended to the notification dated 14.09.2006 clearly indicates that 15 days prior notice should have been given to the project proponents for Patna High Court CWJC No.5104 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026 24/26 holding of the meeting of the EAC/SEAC for considering the project proposal, but, the notice was given to the project proponents i.e. the petitioners merely a day prior to holding of the said meeting, which is totally in contravention of the aforesaid clause and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the afore-quoted judgments.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 800 - Full Document

Dr.Victor J. Fernandes vs Sunny J. Fernandes on 21 December, 2016

In G.J. Fernandez v. State of Karnataka [G.J. Fernandez v. State of Karnataka, (1990) 2 SCC 488] both the principles laid down in Ramana Dayaram Shetty [Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, (1979) 3 SCC 489] were reaffirmed. It was reaffirmed that the party issuing the tender (the employer) "has the right to punctiliously and rigidly"
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 4 - V R Vijayaraghavan - Full Document
1