18 May 1982
MELHADO INVESTMENT LTD. v. ATTORNEY GENERAL
- Citation
- MELHADO INVESTMENT LTD. v. ATTORNEY GENERAL
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMP1532/1981
The restrictive covenant did not impose any positive obligation to keep the demised land perpetually for agricultural use; padi and dry cultivation descriptions fall within 'agricultural or garden ground' (following Watford), but temporary use of such lots for storage of building materials (two‑year sublease for storage of steel) did not amount to conversion of the land into use for building purposes on that land and therefore did not breach the covenant.