Supreme Court of India Judgements

47000 Judgements hosted as on 19/12/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Tenders & Contracts

Tenders & Contracts

Tender and Contract — Eligibility Criteria — Interpretation of “prime contractor” and “in the same name and style” — Requirement of work experience — Where an NIT’s pre-qualification document requires “each prime contractor in the same name and style (tenderer)” to have completed previous work, and the term “prime contractor” is undefined, its meaning must be derived from common parlance as the tenderer primarily responsible for the contract offer; however, the requirement must be construed from the standpoint of a prudent businessman, considering the credentials and capacity to execute the work, not merely the name. (Paras 17, 20, 21.3)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1456 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. SURGUJA BRICKS INDUSTRIES COMPANY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS ( Before : Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. )…

Tenders & Contracts

Coal Mining Bid — Rejection of — Eligibility criteria — Appellants challenged the rejection of its technical bid by Respondent-BCCL for a coal mining project, while the bid of Respondent No. 8 was accepted despite non-compliance with mandatory requirements —Whether BCCL was justified in rejecting the appellant’s bid and accepting the bid of Respondent No. 8, which did not meet the eligibility criteria — Appellant argues that the rejection was arbitrary and discriminatory — The appellant complied with all requirements, while Respondent No. 8 was allowed to submit missing documents later — BCCL argues that the appellant’s bid was non-compliant due to issues with the Power of Attorney — The Tender Committee could seek shortfall documents but not replace them —The Supreme Court found BCCL’s actions arbitrary and illegal, setting aside the rejection of the appellant’s bid and the acceptance of Respondent No. 8’s bid — The appellant’s Power of Attorney was valid and notarized before submission — BCCL’s acceptance of Respondent No. 8’s bid despite non-compliance was unjustified —Government bodies must act fairly and transparently in awarding contracts — The decision-making process must be free from arbitrariness and bias —The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside BCCL’s decision and any subsequent agreements, and directed BCCL to initiate a fresh tender process.

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 757 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BANSHIDHAR CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi…

Tenders & Contracts

Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) — PPA between Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited, and the Hirehalli Solar Power Project LLP — The respondent sought an extension of the scheduled commissioning date (SCD) under the force majeure clause of the PPA due to delays in obtaining necessary approvals and licenses —The Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) rejected the force majeure claim, but the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) reversed the decision, finding that the delay was not attributable to the respondent and that the force majeure clause was applicable — The Supreme Court agreed with the APTEL’s findings and dismissed the appeals — The court also rejected the appellant’s contention that the APTEL’s direction to pay late payment surcharge to the respondent was unjustified, as it was rooted in the PPA and in furtherance of the intention of the parties.

Aug 29, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 631 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. HIREHALLI SOLAR POWER PROJECT LLP AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam…

National Highways Authority Act Tenders & Contracts

National Highways Act, 1956 — National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008 — The Court concluded that it would be impossible to return the collected toll/fee to the road users, and any order modifying the interim order would be detrimental and harmful to the road users as additional amounts would have to be collected to make up for the cost of the highway — Therefore, the Court allowed the present appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court — The Court also directed that the amount lying deposited in the nationalized bank along with interest may now be utilized by NHAI and would be treated as toll/fee collected from the users, and it would be accounted towards the actual cost to be recovered.

Aug 18, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 556 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ARVIND KUMAR THAKUR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before :…

Tenders & Contracts

Contractual Dispute — Dispute over a contract for displaying advertisements on street hoardings — The main issue is whether the debarment of the appellant for five years by the Corporation was valid and justified — The appellant argued that the Corporation could only impose a penalty for late payments, not blacklisting, and that the blacklisting was disproportionate and unfair — The Corporation defended the blacklisting, citing the appellant’s failure to fulfill contractual obligations and non-payment of dues — The Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench’s judgment and restored the Single Judge’s decision, ruling that the blacklisting was disproportionate — The Court found that the appellant had a bona fide dispute with the Corporation and that the blacklisting was a disproportionate penalty — The Court emphasized that blacklisting is a drastic remedy and should only be used in cases involving harm to public interest — The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the blacklisting order and restoring the Single Judge’s judgment.

Aug 13, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 589 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE BLUE DREAMZ ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…

Tenders & Contracts

E-auction — Typographical error — e-auction for a manganese and iron ore block submitted a bid of 140.10% instead of its intended bid of 104.10% due to a typographical error — The court allowed the company’s appeal and ordered a fresh e-auction for the block — The company was also ordered to pay Rs 3 crore ($400,000) to the state as compensation for the delay caused by its error.

Jul 20, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 520 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S OMSAIRAM STEELS & ALLOYS PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, BBSR AND OTHERS — Respondent (…

Constitution Tenders & Contracts

The Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench’s order, restored the Single Judge’s order, and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the principles of delay and latches in judicial proceedings – The Court reasoned that the writ petitioner’s delay in asserting rights and acquiescence to the Corporation’s actions warranted dismissal of the writ petition – The Court cited precedents stating that delay defeats equity and that the High Court may refuse to exercise its extraordinary powers if there is negligence or omission on the part of the applicant – The appeal was allowed, and the writ petition was dismissed on the grounds of delay and latches, with no order as to costs.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 314 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MRINMOY MAITY — Appellant Vs. CHHANDA KOLEY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Aravind Kumar, JJ.…

Mining Tenders & Contracts

Mineral (Auction) Rules, 2015 (as amended by Mineral (Auction) Amendment Rules, 2017) – Rule 9(10), Rule 9(11) and Rule 9(12) – The State Government is expected to be aware of the commercial worth of the natural resources being tendered or auctioned, as well as their potential future earning capacity – Consequently, the statutory regulations outline a bid cum e-auction process that involves not only shortlisting technically qualified bidders but also evaluating specific bids to ensure they meet eligibility criteria for participation in the e-auction – The rules incorporate various safeguards to guarantee transparency and objectivity throughout the bidding process.

Nov 25, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF JHARKHAND — Appellant Vs. SOCIEDADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S.V.N. Bhatti and Sanjiv Khanna,…

Tenders & Contracts

Interpretation of Contract – A commercial document cannot be interpreted in a manner that is at odds with the original purpose and intendment of the parties to the document – A deviation from the plain terms of the contract is warranted only when it serves business efficacy better.

Nov 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. RATNAGIRI GAS AND POWER PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya…

Tenders & Contracts

Work Agreement – Payments and Advances – Payment has to be made in the foreign currency only along with computed interest – It would be open for the parties to pay and the other parties claiming to accept the Indian currency either at the current rate or at the agreed rate but this Court cannot meddle with the terms of the agreement or the award or the directions contained in the judgment of this Court dated 24.02.2015.

Oct 15, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED — Appellant Vs. ROYAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LTD. — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath, JJ.…

You missed

Service

Cochin University of Science and Technology Act, 1986 — Section 31(10) and 31(11) — Selection and Appointment — Validity of Rank List and Communal Rotation — Harmonious Construction — Section 31(10) stipulates that the Rank List remains valid for two years, and vacancies arising during this period “shall be filled up from the list so published” — Section 31(11) mandates that “Communal rotation shall be followed category-wise” — These sub-sections operate in distinct spheres but are not mutually exclusive; the Rank List’s validity period (Sub-sec 10) co-exists with the mandatory application of communal rotation (Sub-sec 11) for every appointment made therefrom — Interpreting Sub-section (11) as becoming operative only after the Rank List expires would render the reservation/rotation requirement otiose during the list’s validity, defeating legislative intent and violating the doctrine of harmonious construction. (Paras 5, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5, 5.5.1, 5.5.2

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Acquittal I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) —Section 302 read with Sections 149 and 148 — Murder —Conviction affirmed by High Court — Appeal to Supreme Court — Sufficiency of evidence — Role of interested/related witnesses — Deposition of PW-4 (mother of deceased and alleged eyewitness) scrutinized closely — Material contradictions found in PW-4’s evidence regarding the manner of assault and who informed her — Failure of prosecution to examine key witness (deceased’s granddaughter, who initially informed PW-4) — Independent witnesses (PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-9) turned hostile — Recovery of weapons based on accused’s memorandum/statement rendered unreliable when supporting witnesses hostile. (Paras 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 — Section 45A — Determination of contributions in certain cases — Preconditions for invoking Section 45A — Section 45A is a special provision for best-judgment assessment applicable only when an employer fails to submit, furnish, or maintain returns, particulars, registers, or records as required by Section 44, OR obstructs an Inspector or official in discharging duties under Section 45 — It is not an alternative mode of assessment available at the option of the Corporation — When records (ledgers, cash books, vouchers, etc.) are produced and the employer cooperates by attending multiple personal hearings, the mere allegation of inadequacy or deficiency of supporting documents does not satisfy the statutory threshold of “non-production” or “obstruction” to invoke Section 45A — Mere inadequacy of records does not confer jurisdiction under Section 45A. (Paras 14.6, 14.7, 24, 25, 27, 30)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw
Tenders & Contracts

Tender and Contract — Eligibility Criteria — Interpretation of “prime contractor” and “in the same name and style” — Requirement of work experience — Where an NIT’s pre-qualification document requires “each prime contractor in the same name and style (tenderer)” to have completed previous work, and the term “prime contractor” is undefined, its meaning must be derived from common parlance as the tenderer primarily responsible for the contract offer; however, the requirement must be construed from the standpoint of a prudent businessman, considering the credentials and capacity to execute the work, not merely the name. (Paras 17, 20, 21.3)

Dec 19, 2025 sclaw