https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25546 In a mining lease, a covenant requiring delivery of the premises in good repair does not, without clear language, create a separate obligation to restore the entire leased land to its original condition. Clause 3 was treated as governing the rent period, not as an independent restoration covenant, and Clause 17 required handing back the mines and related works in good repair and fit for further working. Section 108(m) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 could not be construed in this context as imposing a broader duty inconsistent with mining operations. The estimated restoration liability was therefore not allowable. en-us Fri, 03 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:27:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25546 In a mining lease, a covenant requiring delivery of the premises in good repair does not, without clear language, create a separate obligation to restore the entire leased land to its original condition. Clause 3 was treated as governing the rent period, not as an independent restoration covenant, and Clause 17 required handing back the mines and related works in good repair and fit for further working. Section 108(m) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 could not be construed in this context as imposing a broader duty inconsistent with mining operations. The estimated restoration liability was therefore not allowable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25546