Here there is no question about the contract. – That this court has jurisdiction to enforce a contract between the owner of land and his neighbour purchasing a part of it that the purchaser shall either use or abstain from using the land purchase in a particular way is what I never knew disputed. The defendant moved to discharge that order.ĭuke of Bedford v. An injunction was granted by the Master of the Rolls, to restrain the defendant from converting or using the piece of ground and square garden and the iron railing round the same to or for any other purpose than as a square garden and pleasure ground in an open state, and uncovered with buildings.

The defendant having manifested an intention to alter the character of the square garden, and asserted a right, if he thought fit, to build upon it, the plaintiff, who remained owner of several houses in the square, filed this bill for an injunction. The piece of land so conveyed passed by divers mesne conveyances into the hands of the defendant, whose purchase deed contained no similar covenant with his vendor, but he admitted that he had purchased with notice of the covenant in the deed of 1808. ‗‗that Elms, his heirs, and assigns should, and would from time to time, and at all times thereafter at his and their own costs and charges, keep and maintain the said piece of ground and square garden and the iron railing round the same in its then form, and in sufficient and proper repair as a square garden and pleasure ground, in an open state, uncovered with any buildings, in neat and ornamental order and that it should be lawful for the inhabitants of Leicester Square, tenants of the plaintiff, on payment of a reasonable rent for the same, to have keys at their own expense and the privilege of admission therewith at any time or times into the said square garden and pleasure ground.‘‘ The deed of conveyance contained a covenant by Elms, for himself, his heirs, and assigns, with the plaintiff, his heirs, executors, and administrators. ‗‗Leicester Square Garden or Pleasure Ground, with the equestrian statue then standing in the centre thereof and the iron railing and stone work round the same,‘‘ In 1808 the plaintiff, being then the owner in fee of a vacant piece of ground in Leicester Square, London, as well as of several of the houses forming the square, sold the piece of ground by the description of

Tulk v. moxhay