Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, Supratim Bhattacharya, JJ
M/s. Sukriti Pebbles – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. lease application and renewal context (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on renewal rights under the rules (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. application of the doctrine of frustration in lease renewal (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. counterarguments regarding renewal eligibility (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. implications of lease repeal on renewal rights (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. issues for court determination (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. court's analysis on applicable rules (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 8. determination of renewal rights and implications (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 9. conclusion and judgment order (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.:-
1. The appellant applied for a mining lease for operating a black stonequarry under the West Bengal Minor Mineral Rules , 2002 (for short, “the 2002 Rules”), which was granted by an order dated March 7, 2013. Pursuant to the said grant order, a formal lease deed was executed in favour of the appellant on May 2, 2019 in the ModelForm prescribed under the 2002 Rules.
2. In the meantime, however, the West Bengal Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2016 (in brief, “the 2016 Rules
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
