Chhattisgarh HC: Father Must Provide Maintenance and Marriage Expenses to Unmarried Adult Daughter || Delhi HC Rules That ‘Hermès’ and the 3D Shape of its ‘Birkin’ Bag are Well-Known Trademarks in India || Kerala HC: Arrest is Illegal if Accused isn’t Produced in 24 Hours and Rearrest From Prison is Barred || Supreme Court: Treating Every Sour Relationship as Rape Undermines the Seriousness of the Offence || Supreme Court: Section 7 IBC Application Cannot be Rejected for Curable Defects in Affidavit || NCLT Kochi: Sec 7 Insolvency Cannot be Filed Against Guarantor Without First Enforcing the Guarantee || Patna High Court: Mere Two-And-A-Half-Year Incarceration is Not Sufficient for Bail under UAPA || Bombay HC: Insolvency Cannot be Used to Evade a Family Court’s Maintenance Order || Kerala HC: Forklifts and Factory Cranes Are Motor Vehicles and Must be Registered under MV Act || Guj HC: Edible Crude Palm Kernel Oil Qualifies for Duty Exemption; End-Use Condition not Applicable

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 :