https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179564 The dominant issue was whether the State could deduct amounts from the successful bidder's security/earnest money for failure to lift perishable forest produce when performance was prevented by a court stay obtained in third-party litigation without impleading the bidder. Applying actus curiae neminem gravabit and lex non cogit ad impossibilia, the SC held that a party cannot be penalised for non-performance rendered impossible by an act of court, particularly where the bidder derived no benefit and the State suffered no deprivation attributable to him; "equities" could not justify overriding the HC Single Judge's reasons for refund. The SC set aside the HC Division Bench order and directed refund of the entire earnest money to the bidder. en-us Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Dec 2025 12:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179564 The dominant issue was whether the State could deduct amounts from the successful bidder's security/earnest money for failure to lift perishable forest produce when performance was prevented by a court stay obtained in third-party litigation without impleading the bidder. Applying actus curiae neminem gravabit and lex non cogit ad impossibilia, the SC held that a party cannot be penalised for non-performance rendered impossible by an act of court, particularly where the bidder derived no benefit and the State suffered no deprivation attributable to him; "equities" could not justify overriding the HC Single Judge's reasons for refund. The SC set aside the HC Division Bench order and directed refund of the entire earnest money to the bidder. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179564