<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1712 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310818</link>
    <description>A long-term concession agreement over land was found, on a prima facie view, to support specific performance and interim injunctive relief because it granted exclusive possession and substantial rights to develop, construct, operate and manage the project. The court held that damages would not be an adequate remedy and that the arrangement fell within the exception under Section 14(3)(c). On the facts placed before it, the termination notice was found wrongful and illegal because the petitioner had been given time to complete works, had submitted progress reports, and no contemporaneous breach was shown. The termination notice was set aside and project continuation protected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Nov 2023 17:43:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732320" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1712 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310818</link>
      <description>A long-term concession agreement over land was found, on a prima facie view, to support specific performance and interim injunctive relief because it granted exclusive possession and substantial rights to develop, construct, operate and manage the project. The court held that damages would not be an adequate remedy and that the arrangement fell within the exception under Section 14(3)(c). On the facts placed before it, the termination notice was found wrongful and illegal because the petitioner had been given time to complete works, had submitted progress reports, and no contemporaneous breach was shown. The termination notice was set aside and project continuation protected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310818</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>