Judgments - Work Contract
ABHAY KUMAR PANDEY VERSUS NATIONAL AIDS CONTROL ORGANIZATION (NACO) (THROUGH ITS SECRETARY) & ANR
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI (MCGM) VERSUS ABHILASH LAL & ORS.
MODICARE LIMITED VERSUS GAUTAM BALI & ORS
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI VERSUS ANIL BHASIN
M/S ICOMM TELE LTD. VERSUS PUNJAB STATE WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD & ANR.
M/s Associated Alcohol & Breweries Ltd. vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
M/s Associated Alcohol & Breweries Ltd. vs. State of M.P. & Ors.
Siddhi Vinayak & Another Vs. Union of India & Others
M/s Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Vs. Ghyanshyam Das Dwivedi
Manoj Kumar Vs. State of MP & others
Law laid down - The peon and salesman etc. appointed in country/foreign liquor shops run by the excise department and were terminated 4-5 years thereafter on account of the subsequent change in policy to auction such shops, are not entitled to regularization/absorption in government service as they do not fulfill the requisite conditions contained in the scheme dated 16/5/2007 framed by the State government on the basis of the judgment of the supreme court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Full Judgment
PRENIT WORLD LLP Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.
SUNFLAG IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Law Laid Down - In absence of any averment by the petitioner in respect of completion of stage of third sub-menu (Attach Documents); the attaching documents and/or the bid acknowledgment not received from the system as per the tender conditions, it cannot be said that the decision to declare that the petitioner did not submit technical bid online lacks bona fide. The decision taken by the Technical Evaluation and Tender Approval Committee, which is a committee of experts cannot be interfered Full Judgment
M.P. POWER MANAGEMENT COMPANY LTD. Versus RENEW CLEAN ENERGY PVT. LTD. & ANR
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, UJJAIN & ANR. Versus BVG INDIA LIMITED AND ORS.
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. M/s Optel Telecommunication Ltd
Law Laid down - The learned Arbitrator is bound by the terms of Agreement. Therefore, an award rendered by such an arbitrator cannot be sustained if an Arbitrator has traveled beyond the terms of the agreement to hold that there was an oral agreement prior to placing of Advance Purchase Order, which was accepted by the respondents. The terms of the contract stand crystallized with the issuance of Advance Purchase Order and acceptance of the same. The Arbitral Tribunal has to take Full Judgment
M/s. National Building Construction Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors.
M/s. Sunder Marketing Associates versus State of Haryana & Ors.
MEGHA TECHNICAL & ENGINEERS (PVT.) LTD. VS THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
JSW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED AND ANR. Vs. KAKINADA SEAPORTS LIMITED AND ORS.
BINDESHWARI CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 20.05.2008, passed by High Court of Judicature at Patna, whereby Letters Patent Appeal No. 436 of 2000 was disposed of allowing respondent authorities to withhold 50% of gratuity and 50% of pension, of the appellant. It is also nobody’s case that the appellant caused pecuniary loss to the exchequer. In the light of above, we find force in submission of Full Judgment