SC: Hindu Daughter-In-Law Widowed After Her Father-In-Law’s Death is Entitled to Maintenance || SC: Vendor Remains a Necessary Party in Specific Performance Suits Even After Transferring Property || Raj HC: Having Different Age Criteria For Contractual and Regular Appointments is Unconstitutional || Delhi HC: Registered Property Title Prevails over Claims Based on Oral Family Settlements || Gauhati HC: Only A Family Court Can Grant A Divorce under Muslim Law, Not A Civil Judge || Del HC: Courts Cannot Compel Lawyers to Disclose Sources of Documents Filed on Clients' Instructions || SC Explains When Shares Received After Company Amalgamation are Taxable as Business Income || SC: Excavators, Dumpers Etc Used Within Factories aren’t Motor Vehicles For Road Tax Purposes || SC: Complaints Alleging Fraud under Companies Act Can Be Filed Only By SFIO, Not By Private Parties || SC: Preventive Detention Cannot Override Bail and Requires Proof of a Threat to Public Order

Tata Steel Limited and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. - (High Court of Jharkhand) (17 Sep 2015)

High Court upholds payments demanded by Government for mining leases

MANU/JH/1113/2015

Commercial

Holding that renewal of mining leases was subject to fulfillment of conditions of approval, the Court rejected Petitioners’ petitions against monies demanded by the government. It reiterated that the revenue earned was part and parcel of the development of the State and any restraint on it would profoundly affect the interest of the public at large. The Petitioners had accepted renewal of their leases aware of the payments required, and had failed to establish a case that the same were egregious. The Court directed Tata Steel to furnish payments in three instalments, with the last due in December, 2015.

Tags : MINING LEASE CONDITIONS INSTALMENT

Share :