TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of SC ruled on a contract dispute involving a bidding error where appellant mistakenly bid Rs.1,569 instead of Rs.15,04,64,000. While acknowledging appellant's error in failing to add zeros in the financial bid, the court found Border Roads Organisation's (BRO) response disproportionate. The court determined this was not a Section 20 case of mutual mistake under Indian Contract Act, but rather a unilateral error. BRO's actions in encashing bank guarantee and declaring appellant defaulter were deemed unjustified, given the obvious typographical nature of the error. Court directed appellant to pay Rs.1 crore as penalty, ordering BRO to return the Rs.15.04 crores bank guarantee within one week. Appeal allowed, emphasizing practical resolution of evident mistakes over punitive measures.
TaxTMI 
