Vaibhav Kapoor vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 2171 Del

$~8
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                               Judgment delivered on: 02.05.2017

+        W.P.(C) 3037/2017 & CM No.13262/2017
VAIBHAV KAPOOR                                                        ..... Petitioner
                             versus

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR                                      ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner :         Mr. S.P. Sinha with Mr. Rakesh Mishra, Advocates.

For the Respondents :        Mr. Sachin Nahar, Advocate for respondent No.2.

CORAM:-

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                JUDGMENT

02.05.2017

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner impugns the tender conditions contained in

Clause 4.11(a)(ii) of the Notice Inviting Tender issued by the

respondents.

2. It is contended that the said clause is very harsh, arbitrary

besides being one sided. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that the said clause stipulates that the successful bidder would not be

entitled to terminate the contract for a period of three years whereas

the respondents would have the right to terminate the agreement by

giving one month's notice.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the Notice

Inviting Tender was issued in June 2016. The petitioner has

participated in the bid without any demur and has been successful. It

is contended that post becoming successful, the letter of acceptance

was issued to the petitioner on 02.08.2016 and the petitioner was

directed to deposit the advance licence fee and the maintenance

charges etc.. The petitioner has deposited all the charges and taken

possession.

4. It is submitted that after taking possession, when the petitioner

was required to sign the agreement in terms of the Notice Inviting

Tender, the petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the

above referred tender condition.

5. It may be noticed that the petitioner has voluntarily participated

in the tender process and submitted his bid without any demur. The

petitioner post his participating and becoming successful cannot now

be permitted to challenge the terms and conditions of the Notice

Inviting Tender.

6. The petitioner was very well aware of the tender conditions and

the fact that the conditions stipulated a lock-in period insofar as the

petitioner was concerned. Despite being aware of the same the

petitioner participated without any objection. If the petitioner was

aggrieved by any condition, the petitioner should not have

participated.

7. I find no merit in the petition.

8. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MAY 02, 2017 st