<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1977 (3) TMI 178 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303269</link>
    <description>Waiver of a lease cancellation requires intentional relinquishment of a known right; a later notice issued after cancellation did not revive the terminated lease or invalidate the cancellation. The lessee had notice and an opportunity to explain admitted breaches, so the cancellation procedure satisfied natural justice and the offer of a further personal hearing did not render it unfair. The revisional order was also upheld because reference to matters in the later notice caused no prejudice and there was no demonstrated non-application of mind or reliance on irrelevant material. The challenge to cancellation of the mining lease therefore failed on all grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2022 10:11:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=684746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (3) TMI 178 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303269</link>
      <description>Waiver of a lease cancellation requires intentional relinquishment of a known right; a later notice issued after cancellation did not revive the terminated lease or invalidate the cancellation. The lessee had notice and an opportunity to explain admitted breaches, so the cancellation procedure satisfied natural justice and the offer of a further personal hearing did not render it unfair. The revisional order was also upheld because reference to matters in the later notice caused no prejudice and there was no demonstrated non-application of mind or reliance on irrelevant material. The challenge to cancellation of the mining lease therefore failed on all grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>