https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188938 The court dismissed both writ appeals, upholding the learned single judge's decision. The petitioner was entitled to delivery of 100 M.T. of Aluminium at the original price, and the first respondent's actions in delaying delivery were arbitrary and unreasonable. The court reaffirmed that judicial review under Article 226 is permissible in exceptional cases involving contractual obligations with the State or its instrumentalities, particularly when there is a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. en-us Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Dec 2016 14:28:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188938 The court dismissed both writ appeals, upholding the learned single judge's decision. The petitioner was entitled to delivery of 100 M.T. of Aluminium at the original price, and the first respondent's actions in delaying delivery were arbitrary and unreasonable. The court reaffirmed that judicial review under Article 226 is permissible in exceptional cases involving contractual obligations with the State or its instrumentalities, particularly when there is a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188938