Mohammed Iqbal John Mohammed Qureshi v. the Collector,Bhandara
Case brief
What is this about?
Civil application distinguishing a Division Bench judgment on tender forfeiture liability as facts differ; application rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
3-CAW-754-1 7
1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAW) NO.754 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4100 OF 2008
Mohammed Iqbal John Mohammed Qureshi, Bhandara
-vs-
The Collector, Bhandara
Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Court's or Judge's Orders.
Shri S. Borkar, Advocate for petitioner. Ms R. V. Kalia, AGP for respondent.
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ. DATE : April 04, 2017
Shri S. Borkar, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the issue in the present petition is squarely
covered by the judgment of Division Bench in Western Coalfields Ltd. Rajur vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 831.
Prima facie we are of the considered view that the issue involved in the present case and the issue involved
in case of Western Coalfields Ltd. (supra) are totally different. The issue involved in the said case was as to
whether if a tenderer refuses to continue with the tender
process, apart from forfeiture of his 25% earnest money
3-CAW-754-1 7
2/2
whether he is liable to pay 75% of the balance amount even if he does not desire to continue with the tender.
In the present case the question is as to whether a highest bidder who has deposited 25% earnest money is liable to forfeit the said earnest money if he does not desire to continue with the tender process for auction of sand ghat.
In that view, we find that the present case cannot be covered by the said judgment in Western Coalfields Ltd. (supra). Hence the application is rejected.
JUDGE JUDGE
Asmita
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Western Coalfields Ltd. Rajur vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.Distinguished¶14
2010(6) Mh.L.J. 831 · Who else cites this
Mohammed Iqbal John Mohammed Qureshi
The Collector, Bhandara
B. R. Gavai
A. S. Chandurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court