https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460866 A telecom licence refund claim was held not maintainable where the applicant had already participated in proceedings that culminated in quashing of the licensing process and then sought the same relief through repeated litigation. Restitution under the Contract Act was also unavailable because the claimant was treated as being in pari delicto in the illegality that vitiated the licensing process, so frustration and restitution could not be invoked to recover contractual payments. The challenge to the fresh-auction set-off policy also failed because the classification of successful bidders had a rational basis linked to participation and price discovery, and did not create an unconditional right to refund. en-us Thu, 03 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Feb 2025 22:24:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460866 A telecom licence refund claim was held not maintainable where the applicant had already participated in proceedings that culminated in quashing of the licensing process and then sought the same relief through repeated litigation. Restitution under the Contract Act was also unavailable because the claimant was treated as being in pari delicto in the illegality that vitiated the licensing process, so frustration and restitution could not be invoked to recover contractual payments. The challenge to the fresh-auction set-off policy also failed because the classification of successful bidders had a rational basis linked to participation and price discovery, and did not create an unconditional right to refund. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 03 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460866