Search Results for "tender condition interpretation"

569 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 569 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Advisory Opinion Addresses Scope of Governor's and President's Powers Over State Legislation under Articles 200 and 201. Presidential Reference Seeks Clarity on Constitutional Discretion, Time Limits, and Justiciability in Light of Conflicting Judgments.

The President of India, exercising powers under Article 143(1) of the Constitution, referred fourteen questions to the Supreme Court on 13th May 2025,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Commercial Appeal in Arbitration Dispute — Upholds Arbitral Award Rejecting Claim for 2% Contract Value Without Work Execution. Claim for facilitation fee under MOU fails as appellant did not perform any work for the contract awarded to the joint venture.

The appellant, M/s. Pratibha Industries Limited, filed a commercial appeal under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, read with Section ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Tribunal Orders in SARFAESI Proceeding. Borrowers Failed to Comply with Conditional Orders and Sale Certificate Was Already Issued to Auction Purchaser.

The case arose from a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging two orders of the Debts Recovery Tribuna...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Examines Maintainability of Public Interest Litigations in Road Development Contract Dispute. Reiterates Stringent Locus Standi Requirements Under Article 226 to Prevent Abuse of Process by Meddlesome Bystanders.

The Bombay High Court examined the maintainability of multiple public interest litigations and writ petitions concerning the Kolhapur Integrated Road ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Court Overturns MSETCL's Debarment of BNC Power Projects Limited. Arbitrary and retrospective application of debarment policy deemed unreasonable by the court.

The Respondent ignored their own letter dated 13th August 2020, granting explicit permission to Sai Hotline to sublet work to the Petitioner. This con...