INDERJEET SINGH SIAL versus M/S. KARAM CHAND THAPAR

INDERJEET SINGH SIAL versus M/S. KARAM CHAND THAPAR

The term 'royalty' in the deed was employed in a loose sense, indicating liability for periodic payments by the assignee to the assignor as consideration for the assignment of mining rights, and not as an assertion of sovereign rights. Such payments constituted part of the consideration for the transfer under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act.

Parties
Appellant: Inder Jeet Singh Sial; Respondent: M/s. Karam Chand Thapar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 September 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 30.8.76 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in F.a. No. 29 of 1971
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Deed, Royalty as Consideration, Transfer of Mining Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inder Jeet Singh Sial

Appellant

M/s. Karam Chand Thapar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 30.8.76 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in F.a. No. 29 of 1971

  1. 1 Whether the word 'royalty' as used in the assignment deed was part of the consideration for assignment, or represented the State's share in the mineral

Ratio Decidendi

The term 'royalty' in the deed was employed in a loose sense, indicating liability for periodic payments by the assignee to the assignor as consideration for the assignment of mining rights, and not as an assertion of sovereign rights. Such payments constituted part of the consideration for the transfer under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment and decree of the High Court set aside
  • Decree of the Trial Court restored