<?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>2002 (1) TMI 1333 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287157</link>
    <description>The petition was allowed, and Annexure-L was set aside. The matter was remitted to the second respondent for reconsideration within 15 days, with directions to cancel the award to the third respondent if the petitioner&#039;s bid met the tender conditions. The court emphasized the need for a decision based on the bid documents and the observations made in the order. Each party was to bear its own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2020 10:51:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=608845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (1) TMI 1333 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287157</link>
      <description>The petition was allowed, and Annexure-L was set aside. The matter was remitted to the second respondent for reconsideration within 15 days, with directions to cancel the award to the third respondent if the petitioner&#039;s bid met the tender conditions. The court emphasized the need for a decision based on the bid documents and the observations made in the order. Each party was to bear its own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287157</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>