<?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>2005 (9) TMI 699 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456183</link>
    <description>Unconditional acceptance of a tender within the validity period, together with subsequent conduct such as furnishing a bank guarantee and correspondence on supply, can crystallise a binding concluded contract despite a later request to vary price. On those facts, the supplier&#039;s failure to supply justified risk purchase. An arbitral award will not be interfered with merely because its reasons are brief; where the award refers to the material on record and shows a rational connection between evidence and conclusion, it is not unreasoned or unsupported by evidence. The objections to the award were rejected and the award was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2024 10:46:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=759022" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 699 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456183</link>
      <description>Unconditional acceptance of a tender within the validity period, together with subsequent conduct such as furnishing a bank guarantee and correspondence on supply, can crystallise a binding concluded contract despite a later request to vary price. On those facts, the supplier&#039;s failure to supply justified risk purchase. An arbitral award will not be interfered with merely because its reasons are brief; where the award refers to the material on record and shows a rational connection between evidence and conclusion, it is not unreasoned or unsupported by evidence. The objections to the award were rejected and the award was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>