https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194688 The Court ruled against the forfeiture of the amount deposited by the petitioner in an auction for plot allotment, deeming the forfeiture clause illegal due to the absence of a specific provision. While the petitioner's actions were considered unreasonable, costs were imposed on them to balance equities. The remaining amount was ordered to be refunded within six months to deter similar actions in the future, emphasizing the importance of judicial review in preventing arbitrariness in contractual dealings by government bodies. en-us Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Sep 2017 16:52:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194688 The Court ruled against the forfeiture of the amount deposited by the petitioner in an auction for plot allotment, deeming the forfeiture clause illegal due to the absence of a specific provision. While the petitioner's actions were considered unreasonable, costs were imposed on them to balance equities. The remaining amount was ordered to be refunded within six months to deter similar actions in the future, emphasizing the importance of judicial review in preventing arbitrariness in contractual dealings by government bodies. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194688