2003 PLP 1108 (MLD)

Ss.42 & 54

Suit for declaration and permanent injunction

Claim of plaintiff was that he was a valid purchaser of suit trees being the highest bidder and was entitled to cut and remove them

Competent Authority having not approved the bid of plaintiff, no contract had come into existence

Mere fact that plaintiff had made highest bid, would not bring a valid enforceable contract into existence in case his bid was not accepted by defendant who had invited tenders or bids. City Schools (Pvt.) Ltd. Lahore Cantt v. Privatization Commission, Government of Pakistan and others 2002 SCMR 1150 ref. Malik Muhammad Akram Awan for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 3rd September, 2002. On 22-5-1985 the petitioner filed a suit against the respondent. In the plaint it was stated that on 16-9-1984 trees mentioned in para. 1 of the plaint were auctioned by the respondent. The petitioner made the highest bid of Rs.1,05,000 and made a deposit of 1/4th on the same date; that the respondent had ordered a re-auction on 30-9-1984 when the petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction. Later the said auction was cancelled and suit was withdrawn. With these averments a declaration was sought that the petitioner is a valid purchaser of the said trees being the highest bidder and is entitled to cut and remove the said trees. The suit was 'contested by the respondents with the plea that the competent authority of the respondent had not approved the bid and no contract came into existence. Issues were framed. Evidence of the parties was recorded. The learned trial Court dismissed the suit vide a judgment and decree dated 23-12-1991. A first appeal filed by the petitioner was heard by a learned Additional District Judge, Sargodha who vide a judgment and decree dated 27-3-1995 modified the decree of the learned trial Court and passed a decree in favour of the petitioner for recovery of Rs.27,000 with interest @ Rs.10% per annum.

2. Learned counsel contends that since his client was the highest bidder, the bid could not have been rejected without stating any reasons and as such his client was entitled to the relief as prayed in the plaint. No one has turned up for the respondents. The said contention of the learned counsel is wholly misconceived. It is an admitted fact that the said bid was not accepted. In a recent judgment in the case of City Schools (Pvt.) Ltd., Lahore Cantt v. Privatization Commission, Government of Pakistan and others (2002 SCMR 1150) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has after recapitulating several judgments on the -subject has held that the mere fact that a person has made the highest bid would not bring a valid enforceable contract into existence in case the bid is not accepted, by the party who had invited the tenders or bids. The civil revision is without any force and is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./A-628/L Revision dismissed.