The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the respondent bank's refusal to pre-qualify the petitioner as a contractor, noting lack of merit as other respondents were already qualified for the same project.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 903 OF 2017
Seftech India Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioner. Vs Export Import Bank of India & Anr ..Respondents.
..Respondents.
Mr. Zubin Behram Kamdin a/with Sajeed Mulani I/by Mulani & Co. for the petitioner.
Mr. Charles D'Souza a/with Ms. Aneesa Cheema I/by VERUS for Respondent No.1. Mr Pranil Sonawane a/with N.R. Bhumkar for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Vishal Kanade a/with Ms. Kirtida Chandarana I/by Mehomosh J. Humranwala for Respondent No.4.
Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. Date : July 24, 2018 .
P. C. :
1 / 2
LaddaRS
Package-I of Mining Development of 600 TPD Cement Factory, at Dijbouti contract value of USD 8500000 and pursuant thereto the following developments have taken place:-
[SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.]
[RANJIT MORE, J.]
2 / 2
LaddaRS
Radhakishan Digitally signed byRadhakishan Shivlal ShivlalLadda LaddaDate: 2018.08.3011:51:46 +0530
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition challenging refusal to pre-qualify is meritorious in light of Respondents 3 and 4 being qualified.
Seftech India Pvt. Ltd.
Export Import Bank of India
And Anr
RANJIT MORE
ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
