<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (2) TMI 743 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156289</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s judgment and upheld the University&#039;s decision to award the contract to the appellant. The Court found no arbitrariness or procedural fault in the University&#039;s tender process, emphasizing the necessity of strict adherence to tender terms and the importance of timely project completion for public interest. The appeal was allowed, affirming the validity of the University&#039;s actions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 743 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156289</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s judgment and upheld the University&#039;s decision to award the contract to the appellant. The Court found no arbitrariness or procedural fault in the University&#039;s tender process, emphasizing the necessity of strict adherence to tender terms and the importance of timely project completion for public interest. The appeal was allowed, affirming the validity of the University&#039;s actions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>