In Brief
A buyer who signed an agreement to purchase industrial property in 1994 with a performance date of October 1996, but filed a suit for mandatory injunction in October 1999 (over three years late) with minimal court fee, sought to cure the defect by later paying additional court fee to convert it to a specific performance suit. The Supreme Court held that this deliberate procedural ploy was impermissible. The buyer's three-year delay between issuing a legal notice and filing suit, coupled with the failure to properly value the suit and failure to establish continued readiness and willingness, defeated his claim for the discretionary relief of specific performance. The Court dismissed the petition, affirming that specific performance requires strict adherence to limitation periods and genuine conduct, not technical workarounds."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.