<?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>2026 (7) TMI 637 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794751</link>
    <description>Wrongful suspension of a mining lease was treated as legally unsustainable where it was imposed without notice, on an incorrect view that environmental clearance had lapsed, and without showing the jurisdictional facts required for the power invoked. The leasehold interest was treated as protected property, and the suspension was held void ab initio. The Court further held that the lost operating period could be added to the lease term as compensatory relief under the lease and force majeure arrangement, because the stoppage prevented quiet enjoyment of the leasehold. Delay, laches, and Section 8A of the Mines &amp; Minerals (Development &amp; Regulation) Act, 1957 did not bar restoration of the lost period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2026 08:46:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=911240" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 637 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794751</link>
      <description>Wrongful suspension of a mining lease was treated as legally unsustainable where it was imposed without notice, on an incorrect view that environmental clearance had lapsed, and without showing the jurisdictional facts required for the power invoked. The leasehold interest was treated as protected property, and the suspension was held void ab initio. The Court further held that the lost operating period could be added to the lease term as compensatory relief under the lease and force majeure arrangement, because the stoppage prevented quiet enjoyment of the leasehold. Delay, laches, and Section 8A of the Mines &amp; Minerals (Development &amp; Regulation) Act, 1957 did not bar restoration of the lost period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>