Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2001 (3) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2001 (3) TMI 975 - SC - Indian LawsWhether, by reason of the mining leases, the appellant was executing works undertaken by the Government? Held that:- The appropriate Government has granted and demised to a partnership firm of which the appellant is a partner the right to win minerals from the areas therein mentioned. Clause 23 thereof, which was relied upon, says that if the lessee does not carry out its obligations under the covenants in the lease the lessor may cause the same to be carried out and performed and the lessee shall pay the lessor all expenses in this behalf. There is nothing in this clause in the leases which can support the submission made on behalf of the first respondent that the appellant had entered into a contract for the execution of any works undertaken by the Government. It is only when the appropriate Government has undertaken works, such as the laying of a road, the erection of a building or the construction of a dam, and has entered into a contract for the execution of such works that the contractor is disqualified under Section 9-A. Section 9-A does not operate to disqualify the lessee of a mining lease such as the appellant. Having regard to this conclusion, it is not necessary to deal with the submission on behalf of the appellant that, in any event, the High Court could not have declared the first respondent duly elected. Appeal allowed.
|