Petitioner challenged a tender award to a third respondent. As the agreement was terminated by the DDA, rendering the claim infructuous, the writ petition was dismissed.
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.
$~7
M/S GUPTA SPORTS PLANET & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate.
versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Adv. for DDA.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
%
O R D E R 10.10.2017
The petitioner challenges the award of tender to the third respondent. The agreement was entered into between third respondent and the DDA pursuant to the award of tender on 24.07.2017.
Today learned counsel for the DDA submits that the agreement between it and the third respondent was terminated on 04.10.2017 on the ground of alleged violation of clause 30 of the terms and conditions, a copy of the said termination letter has been produced in the Court; the same is hereby taken on the record. It is also stated that the DDA would issue fresh tender in which the petitioner is at liberty to participate.
In view of the above development, the claim in the proceedings has been rendered infructuous; the writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
SUNIL GAUR, J
OCTOBER 10, 2017/ vikas /
M/s Gupta Sports Planet & Anr
Delhi Development Authority & Anr
S. Ravindra Bhat
Sunil Gaur
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
