AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner is before this Court alleging that the petitioner's bid was cancelled without looking into the title deed produced. The specific contention of the petitioner was that he had produced a title deed in compliance with Condition No. 8(ii) along with the tender document.
We had on the last occasion directed the title deed of the property to be produced. By I.A.No. 1 of 2024, the title deed of the property is produced. It is categorically stated in the affidavit, in support of the document, that the property belongs to the father and mother of the petitioner. We specifically put a query to the petitioner’s Counsel as to whether the father and mother are alive. It is admitted that they are both alive. We look at Clause 8(ii), which is extracted hereunder:
“8(ii) Certificate of personal immovable property worth not less than Rs.25(twenty five) lakhs issued by the competent authority not less than the rank of SDO/CO.”
(underlining by us for emphasis)
The above extract shows that it specifically refers to certificate of personal immovable property. The certificate of immovable property is required only since if any default is committed, on the work awarded, the contractor will have to be proceeded against. It is hence the specific indication that it should be the personal property. The property belongs to the father and mother and not to the petitioner.
In such circumstances, we have absolutely no reason to interfere with the rejection of the petitioner's tender. The writ petition stands dismissed.
Interlocutory application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.