- (1.) We have heard Mr. Sanghi learned counsel appearing in support of the special leave petition. Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, learned Advocate on behalf of the respondent No. 1, Mr. Salve, the learned counsel for respondent No. 7 and Mr. Attorney General, appearing for West Bengal State Electricity Board. Special Leave is granted.
(2.) The case relates to sale of Turbine and boilers with their accessories and fittings installed at Gauripur Thermal Power Station within 24 Parganas (North). The tender notice was issued by the Board inviting offers from intending purchasers accordingly several tenders were filed. Subsequently there was a modification in the terms of the tender and the appellant was informed by a letter from the Board that a sum of over Rs. 3,04,00,000/- had been offered by the respondent No. 7 and if the appellant was interested in purchasing the aforesaid equipments at a higher consideration than Rs. 3,05,00,000/-, he should do so along with 10% of the amount as earnest money. The case of the appellant is that he did not intend to bid so high and he, therefore, gave up his attempt to compete with the respondent No. 7. The matter, however, did not rest there. The present respondent No. I filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court with certain prayers the details whereof are not necessary to set out. When the case was taken up the parties interested in the matter were invited to make fresh offers and ultimately on 12-3-1992 the respondent No. 1 came out to be the highest bidder offering a price ofRs.2, 11, 11, 111/-and an order in his favour was passed by the learned trial Judge. According to the ease of the appellant he got information of the case and the order on 16-3-1992 and made a prayer before the learned trial Judge for passing an order of stay giving the appellant an opportunity to make a further bid. The appellant was allowed to file a written application which was done containing a prayer for setting aside the order dated 12-3-1992. Attempts were made for getting the matter heard expeditiously, but the appellant could not succeed. After waiting for about a week the appellant attempted to get the order set aside in appeal. Ultimately this special leave petition was filed in this Court on 16-4-1992.
(3.) It has been contended by Mr. Sanghi that the appellant was and is ready to offer a sum of Rs. 2,55,00,000/- for the material offered for sale besides paying the sales tax thereon, but he could not make the offer before the High Court because he had no knowledge of the case and he was misled by the letter of the Board dated 26-11-1991 telling him that unless he was prepared to pay a sum higher than Rs. 3,05,00,000/- the articles would not be transferred to him. Now that it transpires that the sale was taking place fora lower amount, he has a right to purchase the articles for the higher offer.;