JUDGMENT

Learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties have agreed for disposal of both these appeals, finally, at the stage of admission itself.

Background in brief :-

2. Respondents, who are common in both appeals are Mine Owners who are, for the sake of brevity, referred to as Mine Owners.

The appellants are Limited Companies.

Both the appellant-Companies are seen to be belonging to one and the same group of Management/Promoters. Two different contracts are entered by mine owner with these different appellants. These two transactions are in fact a package.

Respective appellants in Appeal no. 61/09 and 60/09 are referred to for the sake of brevity as “Buyer” and “Extractor”.

3. It appears that there are legal impediments in subleasing of the mining licence. Most of the Mine Owners and buyers / extractors have devised modality of entering into two contracts, one with buyer and another with extractor to undertake mining activity and processing. Same modality has been used/adopted in the present case as well.

4. The Mine Owners have been giving the work of extraction and processing to a firm or undertaking, which is a different business organization or to different commercial entit