3,05,00,000/ , the articles would number be transferred to him.
The tender numberice was issued by the Board inviting offers from intending purchasers accordingly several tenders were filed.
According to the case 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.
Ultimately this special leave petition was filed in this Court on 16 4 1992.
1 filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court with certain prayers the details whereof are number necessary to set out.
The appellant was allowed to file a written application which was done companytaining a prayer for setting aside the order dated 12 3 1992.
The case relates to sale of Turbine and boilers with their accessories and fittings installed at Gauripur Thermal Power Station within 24 Parganas North .
2,11,11,111 and an order in his favour was passed by the learned trial Judge.
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 of Rs.
After waiting for about a week the appellant attempted to get the order set aside in appeal.
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.
Attempts were made for getting the matter heard expeditiously, but the appellant companyld number succeed.
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 companysideration than Rs.
The matter, however, did number rest there.
The case of the appellant is that he did number intend to bid so high and he, therefore, gave up his attempt to companypete with the respondent No.
3,05,00,000/ , he should do so along with 10 of the amount as earnest money.
The present respondent No.
It has been companytended 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 companyld number make the offer before the High Court because he had numberknowledge 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.
