Madras High Court
The Management Of Bharat Heavy ... vs Val-Met Engineering Pvt. Ltd on 16 August, 2024
Author: D.Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar
W.A.No.2482 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.08.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. D.KRISHNAKUMAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
W.A.No.2482 of 2024 and
CMP No.16180 of 2024
The Management of Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited,
Indira Gandhi Industrial Complex,
Ranipet 632 406. ... Appellant
Vs.
Val-Met Engineering Pvt. Ltd.,
rep. by its authorised signatory Mr.Subramoni P.H.,
Plot No.110 & 111, EPIP, SIPCOT Industrial Complex,
Gummidipoondi 601 201. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent to set aside
the order dated 07.06.2024 made in WMP No.16180/2024 in W.P.No.2442
of 2024.
For Appellant : Mr.A.V.Arun
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2482 of 2024
JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
This intra court appeal has been filed to set aside the order dated
07.06.2024 made in WMP No.16180/2024 in W.P.No.2442 of 2024.
2. The respondent herein has filed the above writ petition to direct the
appellant herein to release the amounts, unlawfully withheld under the
contract/ purchase order dated 20.06.2023, towards the alleged risk
purchase, under purchase order No.7411052, dated 20.04.2021.
2.1. Along with the above writ petition, the respondent herein has
filed a petition in WMP No.16180/2024 to direct the appellant herein to
consider the offer dated 31.05.2024, submitted by the respondent, in
response to the tender No.2024- BHEL- 35362- 1, dated 3.5.2024.
2.2. The learned Single Judge, while ordering the said WMP
No.16180/2024, has observed that the respondent has not been black listed
and hence directed the appellant to process the tender of the respondent as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and when the remaining tender opened, subject to the result of the writ
petition. The above said order is challenged before this court.
3. According to the appellant, the respondent company has not
supplied the materials, as agreed in the terms and conditions of the purchase
order, and they have supplied only part of materials, viz., 45.65 MT with
1000 mm sheets and defaulted to supply the remaining materials. It is
further contended by the appellant that, inview of the default committed by
the respondent in supplying pending quantities, the appellant has called for
new tenders from the bidder. Hence, the respondent is disqualified from
participating in the new tender, inview of the invocation of the risk purchase
clause. In this regard, the appellant has also issued a letter dated
20.07.2023, informing the respondent about the exercising of the risk
purchase clause, however, without challenging the same, the respondent has
filed the petition for direction along with the writ petition, as stated supra,
which is not maintainable. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the
learned Single Judge is liable to be dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and we have perused
the materials on record.
5. The appellant has raised various grounds in the appeal, however,
has not relied upon any specific provision to show that the respondent is
estopped from participating in the subsequent tender invited by the
appellant company, inview of the default committed by them in the earlier
tender. Further, the learned Single Judge has passed the interim order, by
directing the appellant only to process the tender of the respondent, subject
to the result of the writ petition. In our view, no prejudice would be caused
to the appellant, if the tender submitted by the respondent is processed,
because, the same shall be taken into effect, only after the outcome of the
writ petition. Further, the appellant is having every right to raise all their
grounds before the Single Judge by filing counter affidavit, objecting the
claim made by the respondent. Therefore, we find no error in the order
passed by the learned Single.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Liberty is granted to
the appellant to raise all the grounds before the learned Single Judge, as
raised in the writ appeal. Considering the fact that the dispute involved in
the present writ appeal is with regard to the tender notification, the learned
Single Judge is requested to consider the same and dispose the writ petition
at an earliest.
(D.K.K., A.CJ.) (P.B.B.J.)
Internet: Yes/No 16.08.2024
Index : Yes/No
mst
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
and
P.B.BALAJI, J.
mst
16.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
