High Court Of Delhi Holds That Specific Contractual Provisions Prevail Over General Contractual Provisions

The High Court of Delhi, through its judgment dated 22.06.2026 in Grew Energy Private Limited v. NTPC Renewable Energy Limited¹ , held that where a specific provision governs a particular default, recourse must be had to such provision in preference to general provision.

NTPC Renewable Energy Limited (“NTPC”) had awarded contracts for supply of Solar PV Modules to Grew Energy Private Limited (“Grew”). Although Grew accepted the Notifications of Award, it failed to execute the formal contract agreement and furnish the Contract Performance Guarantee (“CPG”). Thereafter, NTPC inter alia terminated the awards, encashed the bid security, issued a fresh tender and suspended Grew from participating in future tenders for six months. Grew challenged the termination notice contending that, failure to execute the contract agreement or furnish the CPG only entitled NTPC to annul the awards and forfeit the bid security.

The Court observed that NTPC had invoked Clause 42.0 of the General Purchase Conditions (“GPC”) and terminated the contract however Clause 34.0 of the Special Purchase Conditions (“SPC”) prescribed the consequence for failure to execute the contract agreement and furnish the CPG, which was annulment of the award and forfeiture of the Bid Security. Accordingly, held that NTPC could not invoke Clauses of the GPC for the same default. Consequently, the Court set aside inter alia the termination notice to the extent it was founded on the GPC as provisions in the SPC prevailed over the provisions in the GPC.     

Footnote

^{1 W.P.(C) 8148/2026}

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.